Va vol 40 no 9 sep 2012

SEPTEMBER 2012

Thank You from Ford and EAA!

The partnership between EAA and Ford spans more than a decade and the connection continues to grow. Our mutual goal is to continually enhance the EAA member experience.

EAA values the relationship with Ford and Ford’s support of the opening day Steve Miller concert, the nightly Fly-In movie theater, the spectacular Red Tails Edition Mustang benefitting the Young Eagles, and much more.

AirVenture 2012 was an extraordinary event and we look forward to seeing you next year!

Rod Hightower President & CEO, EAA

Edsel B. Ford II Board Director, Ford Motor Co.

EAA members are eligible for special pricing on Ford Motor Company vehicles through Ford’s Partner Recognition Program.

To learn more on this exclusive opportunity for EAA members to save on a new Ford vehicle, please visit www.eaa.org/ford.

VEHICLE PURCHASE PLAN PMS 661

PMS 430

A I R P L A N E Vol. 40, No. 9

2012

SEPTEMBER 6

CONTENTS 2 Straight and Level

Legislation and other highlights

by Geoff Robison

3 News

4 A New Chapter

by H.G. Frautschy 6 A Cure for the Ancient Engine I could have had a V-8 instead

by Budd Davisson

PMS 661

Blues:

PMS 124

Andrew King, Soldier of Fortune of Antique Aviation

14

Adventure awaiting

by Gilles Auliard

18 Ed Heath’s Airplanes Remembering Ed Heath

by Bob Whittier 22 Light Plane Heritage The Hows and Whys of Aircraft Tubing

by Bob Whittier 29 Vintage Books of Interest review by H.G. Frautschy 30 The Vintage Instructor Some rules of thumb for vintage pilots

by Steve Krog, CFI 32 The Vintage Mechanic Aircraft covering, Part 2

by Robert G. Lock

STAFF

EAA Publisher Director of EAA Publications Editor Business Manager Senior Art Director

Rod Hightower J. Mac McClellan H.G. Frautschy Kathleen Witman Olivia P. Trabbold

Advertising: Sue Anderson Jonathan Berger Jeff Kaufman

38 Mystery Plane

by H.G. Frautschy

VAA, PO Box 3086, Oshkosh, WI 54903

39 Classifieds 40 All the Difference in the Sharing a common perspective

by Michelle Souder

14

World

For missing or replacement magazines, or any other membership-related questions, please call EAA Member Services at 800- JOIN-EAA (564-6322).

COVERS

FRONT COVER AND BACK COVERS: The Seabee has been a favorite of web-footed pilots for decades, but the Franklin engine in the airplane often made potential buyers shy away. As detailed in Budd Davisson’s article beginning on page 6, Brian Robinson has created a drop-in engine conversion using a General Motors LS series V-8 engine that gives more power, greater economy and has proven to be more reliable than the original engine. Brian’s brightly polished Bee graces our front cover, while another of the converted Bee amphibians is shown on the back cover; Buss and Jannette Hale’s “Thunderbee.” EAA photos by Jim Koepnick.

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 1

STRAIGHT & LEVEL Geoff Robison EAA #268346, VAA #12606 president, VAA

Legislation and other highlights Pilot’s Bill of Rights Signed Into Law Excellent news was recently announced regarding the Pilot’s Bill of Rights legislation. This very exciting legislation was unanimously passed in the Senate in late June and was then passed in the House of Representatives in late July of this year. Then on August 3 the president signed the legislation into law, providing us all with many new rights designed to put us on a level playing field with any FAA enforcement actions. This proved be a real bipartisan effort by our Congress, which is no small task with any legislation being considered inside the Beltway these days. Special recognition is in order to Sens. James Inhofe of Oklahoma and Mark Begich of Alaska who sponsored this legislation in the Senate as well as Reps. Sam Graves of Missouri and Dan Lipinski of Illinois who sponsored the legislation in the House of Representatives. We all owe a huge debt of gratitude to these gentlemen. This legislation guarantees pilots under investigation by the FAA expanded protection against enforcement actions via access to investigative reports and to air traffic control and flight service recordings, and it also requires the FAA to provide us the evidence it is using against us as the basis of its enforcement action at least 30 days in advance of any action on its part. Having access to all available information, including FAA data, is critical for pilots who find themselves under investigation or whose certificates may be in jeopardy.

This bill also establishes an advisory committee to analyze the notice to airmen (NOTAM) procedures,

2 SEPTEMBER 2012

as well as a committee to review medical certifications.

The bill also now allows pilots the ability to appeal any FAA decisions for enforcement action in our federal courts. Furthermore, the NTSB is empowered with greater oversight in reviewing FAA enforcement actions.

This well-written and comprehensive bill puts us all as pilots in a much better position to challenge these enforcement actions. This may well be the best news to positively impact the GA community in more than a decade, but we all need to stay diligent in our personal efforts to avoid the potential for enforcement action in the first place.

It is also important here to again recognize the efforts of the EAA and AOPA, who helped compile the legal issues and enforcement procedure background that led to the final bill that now provides us all this important protection of our pilot’s rights, and our freedom of flight.

Hometown Young Eagles Coordinators Recognized Nationally!

Phillips 66 Aviation Leadership Award Congratulations to David and Laramie Resler for being awarded the 2012 Phillips 66 Aviation Leadership Award! This award appropriately recognizes their hard work as Young Eagles coordinators for EAA Chapter 2 and Vintage Chapter 37 as well as their dedication to the program outside of our normal rallies. David and Laramie received their award at the annual Young Eagles Awards Dinner in Oshkosh on Wednesday, July 25. We sincerely thank them for all the effort put forth to introduce

kids to aviation and in making sure our Young Eagles rallies are safe and enjoyable for everyone.

The personal efforts of these two YE coordinators is greatly appreciated by the local chapters of EAA/VAA in the Fort Wayne, Indiana, area. Their efforts allowed the local chapters to host four local teens’ attendance at the EAA Air Academy in Oshkosh in 2012.

Oshkosh 2012 proved to be one of the safest events ever, and I am especially excited to report that all venues of the VAA area of responsibility experienced excellent results. I am particularly excited to report that the Aeromart consignment area at AirVenture was very successful in its inaugural year of being operated by the Vintage Aircraft Association. Aeromart takes in aircraft parts for sale during the fly-in, with the proceeds being split between the seller, VAA, and EAA. The area exceeded its revenue and volunteer goals well beyond expectations for 2012, as it was ably handled by Chairman Paul Kyle, Co-chairman Warren Baier, and key volunteers Matt Krinn and Brad Hartz. Many thanks to the dozens of volunteers who came to help us through our first year of operations. Special thanks to those volunteers from EAA Chapter 252 who stuck with us and showed us the ropes on the operation of this great membership benefit. Your assistance was certainly key to this success.

As always, please do us all the favor of inviting a friend to join the VAA, and help keep us the strong association we have all enjoyed for so many years.

VAA NEWS New Ground Adjustable Aluminum Propellers and Hubs MT-Propeller puts ground adjustable propellers back into production after nearly 70 years During EAA AirVenture 2012, MTPropeller announced the availability of its new 5400-Series of 2-blade ground adjustable aluminum propellers for vintage aircraft. The new propellers are new versions of the ground adjustable propellers made by the famous Standard Steel Propeller Company (later Hamilton Standard) manufactured from 1925 through 1945.

This type of propeller, used primarily on vintage aircraft, has been out of production for decades, making the propellers scarce.

Gerd Muehlbauer, president of MT-Propeller, said, “While MTPropeller is known for what may be considered more ‘modern’ propeller designs, we recognized the important role we could play in keeping vintage aircraft flying and safe.

We are pleased to offer these new ground adjustable blades and completely new hubs.”

The newly produced and certificated propellers are typically used on radial engines of up to 450 h.p. at 2,300 r.p.m. and in diameters of between 7 and 10 feet. There are three different blade model designations: 1C1, A1C1 and A11C1, each available in different lengths.

The blades mate with one of two newly manufactured steel propeller hubs: models 5404 and 5406 (SAE 20 & SAE 30 spline).

The project to bring these propellers back into production was started nearly ten years ago by Greg Herrick, President of the Aviation Foundation of America, Inc. According to Herrick, “We recognized the importance of finding someone to put these propellers back into production as the supply of used blades, some over 80 years old, began to dwindle. We are grateful to MT-Propeller for making this possible. Having newly manucontinued on page 37

Nominat ions

C A L L F OR V I N TA G E A I R C R A F T A S S O C I AT ION

Nominate your favorite vintage aviator for the EAA Vintage Aircraft Association Hall of Fame. A great honor could be bestowed upon that man or woman working next to you on your airplane, sitting next to you in the chapter meeting, or walking next to you at EAA AirVenture Oshkosh. Think about the people in your circle of aviation friends: the mechanic, historian, photographer, or pilot who has shared innumerable tips with you and with many others. They could be the next VAA Hall of Fame inductee—but only if they are nominated.

The person you nominate can be a citizen of any country and may be living or deceased; his or her involvement in vintage aviation must

have occurred between 1950 and the present day. His or her contribution can be in the areas of flying, design, mechanical or aerodynamic developments, administration, writing, some other vital and relevant field, or any combination of fields that support aviation. The person you nominate must be or have been a member of the Vintage Aircraft Association or the Antique/Classic Division of EAA, and preference is given to those whose actions have contributed to the VAA in some way, perhaps as a volunteer, a restorer who shares his expertise with others, a writer, a photographer, or a pilot sharing stories, preserving aviation history, and encouraging new pilots and enthusiasts.

To nominate someone is easy. It just takes a little time and a little reminiscing on your part.

•Think of a person; think of his or her contributions to vintage aviation.

•Write those contributions in the various categories of the nomination form.

•Write a simple letter highlighting these attributes and contributions. Make copies of newspaper or magazine articles that may substantiate your view.

•If at all possible, have another individual (or more) complete a form or write a letter about this person, confirming why the person is a good candidate for induction.

This year’s induction ceremony will be held near the end of October. We’ll have follow-up information once the date has been finalized.

We would like to take this opportunity to mention that if you have nominated someone for the VAA Hall of Fame; nominations for the honor are kept on file for 3 years, after which the nomination must be resubmitted.

Mail nominating materials to: VAA Hall of Fame, c/o Charles W. Harris, Transportation Leasing Corp.

PO Box 470350

Tulsa, OK 74147 E-mail: cwh@hvsu.com Remember, your “contemporary” may be a candidate; nominate someone today!

Find the nomination form at www.VintageAircraft.org, or call the VAA office for a copy (920-426-6110), or on your own sheet of paper, simply include the following information: • Date submitted.

• Name of person nominated.

• Address and phone number of nominee.

• E-mail address of nominee.

• Date of birth of nominee. If deceased, date of death.

• Name and relationship of nominee’s closest living relative.

• Address and phone of nominee’s closest living relative.

• VAA and EAA number, if known. (Nominee must have been or is a VAA member.)

• Time span (dates) of the nominee’s contributions to vintage aviation.

(Must be between 1950 to present day.)

• Area(s) of contributions to aviation.

• Describe the event(s) or nature of activities the nominee has undertaken in aviation to be worthy of induction into the VAA Hall of Fame.

• Describe achievements the nominee has made in other related fields in aviation.

• Has the nominee already been honored for his or her involvement in aviation and/or the contribution you are stating in this petition? If yes, please explain the nature of the honor and/or award the nominee has received.

• Any additional supporting information.

• Submitter’s address and phone number, plus e-mail address.

• Include any supporting material with your petition.

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 3

A New Chapter by

H.G. Frautschy

“Change,” they say, is inevitable.

“Change, or die,” others espouse.

Change means regrowth, rebirth, a new door opening. All of those clichés have some grain of truth to them, and even into the life of a guy whose career is focused on a group of airplanes from the past, change must come.

This will be the 263rd issue of Vintage Airplane I’ve been privileged to edit, and it will be my last as editor and executive director of the VAA. For the October issue, I’ll be passing the figurative editor’s red pencil to my Oshkosh hangar neighbor and fellow Aeronca pilot, Jim Busha. Jim, who serves the local community as a law enforcement officer, has been an active writer and contributor for Sport Aviation, Flight Journal, and Vintage Airplane, and he’s been the editor of Warbirds for the past few years. So the editor’s job moves full circle, as my time at EAA started as the editor of both Vintage Airplane and associate editor of Warbirds way back 22 years ago, in 1990. My best wishes to him and our great stable of contributing writers for the next edition of Vintage Airplane.

In looking back over the 22 years I’ve spent at EAA HQ, what’s the first thing that comes to mind?

The satisfaction in knowing that every day I came to work, I made a member’s day a bit better by helping them dig up a tidbit of information or history. For all my

4 SEPTEMBER 2012

time here I’ve had folks come up to me, especially during convention, and tell me they thought I had the best job in the world. And you know what? They were right!

It’s been great fun being able to go to work each day anticipating that just about every time you contact someone, it’s to give them the gift of knowledge, to share a photo or some information they really want. So to each of you who called, wrote, e-mailed, or stopped by, thank you for being an enthusiastic EAA and VAA member.

You all made this job the greatest for a guy like me.

Of course, during 22 years, a number of wonderful folks have come and gone. To recall everyone is impossible, but a few stand out in the VAA family. I’ve been blessed with working with and being friends with so many neat people who are no longer with us. Jack Cox, the man who saw my potential in 1990 and took a chance on a budding writer who really loved old airplanes. Espie “Butch” Joyce, VAA’s president for the first decade I was at EAA, a great mentor and friend who helped me understand the meaning of the term “southern gentleman.” And the late VAA director and volunteer Dean Richardson of Madison, Wisconsin, who taught me more about being a manager and a leader than any one man, and who’s abiding friendship is something I’ll always treasure and remember. There isn’t a day,

five years later, that I don’t miss him. They’re all gone now, but I’m eternally grateful for the help they gave me during my time at EAA. I have to say a few words about two men who made this career choice possible: Paul and Tom Poberezny. Paul, who has been a lifelong friend and “Grandpa Paul” to our two children, had just retired as president only a little while before I arrived. Already a friend thanks to an opportunity to volunteer at EAA’s Pioneer Airport when we moved to Wisconsin in 1988, his kind guidance and suggestions throughout the years have been invaluable to the VAA. He still has the same welcoming, all-inclusive attitude and understanding that all of us in aviation want to have a place to call our own, and for many of us, it’s EAA. His coming to that realization back in the early 1950s made all of this possible.

His son, Tom, also deserves our thanks and praise; the building we enjoy as the museum and EAA headquarters offices were constructed under his watchful engineer’s eye, and as the convention and EAA programs grew, he did his best to remind us to “keep our eye on the ball” and work to meet the members’ expectations. So to both Tom and Paul, my deepest, heartfelt thanks for a job well done while I was privileged to work with you.

Twenty-two years here at EAA headquarters has seen a lot of

change in the editorial world.

When I began in October of 1990, after becoming a part of the editorial team that was composed of Jack and Golda Cox, Mary Jones, Norm Petersen, and Isabelle Wiske, we were creating our words on a set of Macintosh Classic computers, and sending those words via a 56k dial-up modem to our printer in Random Lake, Wisconsin. The printer would typeset the words into columns and then fax the text back to us for rough layout using copiers and a waxer to create pasteups of each page. We’d send the great slides of airplanes shot by Jim Koepnick and others to the printer for scanning on the mysterious “drum scanner.” Nowadays, we send the final words and digital photos to our ace in-house art director, Livy Trabbold, who creates the pages for Vintage Airplane and then sends a high-resolution PDF right to the printer, who then creates a printing plate. Before you know it, the magazines are rolling off the press. Simply amazing!

Livy has laid out our magazine longer than anyone has, and we all owe her our thanks for making the magazine a pleasure to read and view. Colleen Walsh, my “secret weapon” of a copy editor, makes sure my commas and apostrophes are all in the right spot, even if I didn’t originally put them there.

A tip of the old flying cap to you both as you continue to serve the EAA and VAA membership!

The ability to communicate with members today is far easier than typing a letter, licking a stamp and putting it into the mail, and that change has also brought with it different expectations as to how those communications should happen, and how often. As VAA moves on to address those realities, I’m confident that the board, officers, and volunteers who help make this the most popular of the special interest groups within EAA will continue to evolve, and we’ll all be better for it. All I ask is that you have patience with both them

and the staff. If you ever have a chance to serve on a nonprofit’s board of directors, I hope you are as lucky as I; Geoff Robison and the VAA board has been a joy to work with and I enjoy many friendships within that group. I wish them all well!

Each change takes time, and the best way to make it great is to contribute! Write up your local fly-in or send the editor a short piece on a technical tip or local aviator or airplane that you think could be of interest to other VAAers. And don’t just call to tell him about it, write it up! Don’t worry about how; just do it, to paraphrase a sportswear manufacturer. I’ll tell you right now, nothing makes an editor smile like a mailbox full of contributions of useful information that he can use.

After all, this is your magazine, so helping him is helping us all.

To the many EAA staffers who have been so great to work with over the past two decades, I can only say how much I really have enjoyed our work together. It hasn’t always been fun (the days and weeks following 9/11 in particular were challenging and nerve-racking as we came to grips with the reality that aviation wouldn’t ever be the same), but the outcome has, far more often than not, been something I’m proud to hang my name upon. My best wishes to Rod and the new crew at EAA, as they work to adjust the organization to a new reality as sport aviation in the United States and around the world continues to evolve.

My deepest thanks to my assistant, Theresa Books, who has held down the desk just outside of my office during most my time as the VAA executive director. If you’re really lucky in business, you’ll have someone just like her working as part of your team. She likes to do many of the things I’m not especially gifted at, and we often find ourselves thinking the same thing about a particular

subject, even when we’re not even in the same building. Her cheerful attitude and genuine love of her fellow VAA members has made it a joy to come to work and hear, as Norm Petersen used to say, “her smiling voice.” She will continue to serve the VAA membership in a redefined role after my departure.

And finally, a huge thank you to my family; my wife, Brenda, who shares a love of these great old airplanes and who, like me, looks forward to restoring our Aeronca Super Chief, and to our kids, Alden and Jenny, who both literally grew up at EAA, having been a toddler and a baby when I began here.

They are both now young adults who have a deep and abiding love of aviation, and that’s due in large part to the extended family of VAAers who helped us raise these two great people. They have long had to tolerate the absence of their husband and father for nearly two months out of the year (Brenda and Kristen Burton used to refer to themselves as “Oshkosh widows” during that time), and I was fortunate that they all embraced the EAA world, each volunteering in their own areas as the years have gone by.

So as this chapter in my story comes to a close, please know that I greatly appreciate all the kind words and thoughts you’ve sent my way during the past two months, and I look forward to seeing many of you around the convention grounds and other fly-ins during the coming years. And who knows, perhaps our airways will cross again. Until then, keep renewing your membership, as I will, and recruit a few new members along the way. Nothing keeps an organization more viable than new blood, so ask friends to join us, and they’ll find out what we already know—this is the best kind of flying there is. Let’s keep it going!

See ya around the pattern!

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 5

A Cure for the Ancient Engine

KOEPNICKPHOTOGRAPHY.COM

6 SEPTEMBER 2012

Blues:

I could have had a V-8 instead by

B udd D avisson

Let’s say you have a wonderfully useful airplane, but every time you open the cowling, all you see in there is a boat anchor—a rusty, expensive, unreliable boat anchor. However, sitting right outside of your hangar door is a nice, new Chevy. Every time you open the Chevy’s hood you see a shiny, state-of-the-art, totally reliable V-8. It’s about the same size and weight as your present engine.

So, you do the obvious: you substitute

the Chevy for the boat anchor, and trundle off over the horizon.

Where that kind of mechanical magic used to be a near impossibility, the FAA has recently made it much easier to do, by putting the aircraft into the Experimental Exhibition category. Where that used to limit the utility of the aircraft somewhat, that is no longer the case.

Ask Brian Robinson of Lindsay, Ontario, and Buzz Hale of Incline Village,

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 7

PHIL HIGH PHIL HIGH

Don’t let the polished exterior fool you. C-FILM is no hangar queen, as the scuffed side panel can attest. In addition to the swing-up doors on each side, the nose features a hatch that opens up on one side, allowing the crew to step onto the beach without getting their feet wet.

PHIL HIGH

Moving the hinges to the top of the door and adding pneumatic springs creates a pair of flip-up doors that give the Bee’s pilot and passengers unparalleled access to the beach or lake. On land, a short ladder can be very helpful.

Brian Robinson, of Robinson V-8 Power, has created a solid, economical solution to the problem of engine replacement in the Seabee.

8 SEPTEMBER 2012

Nevada. They’d love to tell you how well this has been working for them.

Seabees have been part of the Robinson family for a long time. In fact, Brian’s father had one. He says, “He sold the Seabee when I was two years old, but it imprinted itself on my memories and, as I got older, I developed a burning desire to own one. After all, I live where an amphibian of any kind makes a huge amount of sense, and the Seabee makes more sense than most. It’s affordable, strong, has lots of room, and is easy to take off and land. It is, however, an airplane in search of a bigger motor.”

Brian scratched his Seabee itch when he talked his dad into buying a derelict airframe (there are apparently lots of them, for reasons we’ll discuss in a minute) in 1969 and got

KOEPNICKPHOTOGRAPHY.COM

it flying a year later.

He says, “As soon as we bought the Seabee, my dad immediately started telling me horror stories about the Franklin engine. In fact, he said that at one point he had over 30 unserviceable cylinders laying around because the Franklin ate them like popcorn.”

The 6-cylinder, 500-cubic inch, Franklin Aircooled Motors 6A8-215B9F is apparently no one’s favorite engine. No one’s! This is especially true of Seabee owners, because it’s a classic case of too much airplane and not enough motor. To compound the lack of power (215 hp), the engine is famed for its lack of reliability and being difficult to support.

Buzz says, “It should be noted, however, that there are always those who want to keep everything origi-

PHIL HIGH

Buzz Hale’s Canadian-registered Bee (now certified in the US as Experimental-Exhibition, and registered as N300TB) is more like a high-end aerial RV, capable of taking Buzz and his wife, Jannette, anywhere they want to go, and in sumptuous comfort. Their version of the conversion is dubbed the “ThunderBee.” nal, and, as a result, put up with the limitations. Any of the Franklins still flying that I am aware of have been extensively modified with unapproved parts. There have been no new Franklin engine parts built since 1950, so anyone who claims his engine is 100 percent original is kidding themselves. AC 23-27 allows substitution of parts that are no longer available, but does not allow you to substitute the engine. You can fly a Franklin with over 50 percent untested substituted parts, modified cylinders, etc.”

Brian further explains, “There were approximately 1,000 Seabees built by Republic in 1946/47. However, by the early 1950s, Franklin decided to stop supporting the engine. Then they went bankrupt (the type certificate and production of the engine moved overseas, to Poland). Since that day, Seabee owners have been flying with essentially orphaned engines. And not a very good engine, at that. They have terrible cylinder problems because they have too much metal in the wrong places and, when they cool and

PHIL HIGH

The Bee’s water rudder is neatly tucked under the swept-up section of the aft hull. When the landing gear is retracted for water operations, the tailwheel pivots 90 degrees to keep it out of the way.

KOEPNICKPHOTOGRAPHY.COM

PHIL HIGH

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 9

C-FILM and C-FOME cruise along the marshlands on the west end of lake Butte des Morts, showing that the outstanding design of Percival Spenser, as interpreted by Republic Aviation in the immediate postwar years, is a more than viable aircraft.

KOEPNICKPHOTOGRAPHY.COM

10 SEPTEMBER 2012

shrink, they crack. For that reason, good, original cylinders are getting very, very hard to find. A lot of Seabees have essentially been grounded simply because the engines are so hard to keep running or the owners are unwilling to fly them because of their lack of reliability.

“No one knows what the official TBO of the engine is because the Canadian DOT could find no documentation of it, so apparently Franklin never published it. However, a 1,200hour Franklin is considered to be very high-time. Further, few of these engines make it to 1,200 hours with all of the original cylinders. Because the Seabee is so dependent on having all 215 horses available, the airplanes are approaching being unsafe to fly, because the engines are so likely to get sick without warning. You have to inspect and maintain them carefully. The reason we had so many unserviceable jugs sitting around is because we were continually changing cylinders . . . they rarely lasted 300 hours.

As if the engines weren’t a big enough problem, the special pusher propellers are equally problematic.

“The original props have been AD’d to death,” Brian says, “and blades have become very difficult to locate in airworthy condition because of water erosion—nearly impossible in fact. This forces people to buy new blades from Hartzell—a waste of money on an old-generation propeller.”

“It’s a shame that the engine is grounding so many of the airplanes because the Seabee really is an amazing airframe. When Republic started building them, they had just finished building Thunderbolts and such for World War II, so they were really set up to build metal airplanes. If they had been a smaller company, the Seabee probably wouldn’t have been designed the way it was. Many of its skins are heavy-sheet that is hydroformed into shape with the corrugations, giving them strength and making them part of the structure.

Those kinds of processes required large machinery that the average

light aircraft plant didn’t have. For that reason, it’s a very strong airplane. Also, because the heavy skins carry so much of the load, the Seabee doesn’t have nearly as many parts as a normal airplane. The wings, for instance, have almost no ribs because the corrugated skins hold their shape. The corrugations also act as drains so water doesn’t pool inside and the alloy used is practically impervious to fresh water.”

The Seabee is designed with several roles in mind and it would perform them all much better with more power.

Brian says, “A normal Franklin Seabee weighs around 2,300 pounds empty—the actual weight depends on how it has been fitted out—and grosses 3,150, but, with its large cabin, it’s really easy to overload it because the power is so marginal.

Even though it’s underpowered, however, it’s still a terrific airplane, just as it is. It’s a little hard to decide whether it’s a boat that flies or an airplane that floats, because it is so good on the water. In terms of handling, it’s one of the more forgiving amphibians to land. And with the size of the cabin and the way the doors are designed, it’s the perfect airplane to load up with your fishing gear and drop into your favorite lake.”

The solutions for a lot of life’s problems are put in motion by a single event that galvanizes someone into action. In the case of the Chevy Seabee, it was a flight that Brian took with his daughter.

He remembers, “We were flying along when the engine began to lose power. It needed all six cylinders to fly and at least one, maybe more, were dropping off-line, and we were coming down whether we wanted to or not. Fortunately, there was a farm field within reach and the landing was fairly eventful. However, the airplane hadn’t stopped rolling before I looked over at my daughter and made up my mind that something had to be done about the Seabee engine situation. I loved the airplane, but I loved my family too. So I started looking for a solution.”

How Can This Be Done?

According to the current FAA Order 8130.2G, the Experimental-Exhibition category is available for this type of project under Paragraph 4110 C as a Group 2 Aircraft, which includes vir tually all civil aircraft under 12,500 pounds.

The process is fairly straightforward: The project parts must first be de-registered from the FAA registr y.

Written permission needs to be obtained from your local FSDO office to remove any data plates from the project aircraft. Then the project can be recertified as an experimental-exhibition project. This frees you up from the restrictions that normally apply to modifying a certified airplane. Even better, the area operating restrictions that formerly applied to all Experimental-Exhibition aircraft were updated in 2010 (ef fective April 2011). The current 8130.2G Guidance for ExperimentalExhibition has removed the limited proficiency area for Group 2 aircraft.

The proficiency is now considered to be the entire Continental US. However an annual program letter must be kept updated with your local FSDO listing any public events that you will be exhibiting the aircraft at. All other flights are considered proficiency flights, which includes all aspects of the normal operation of the aircraft. Suddenly solving the boat anchor engine problem is much easier.

North of the Canadian border, there never has been a problem with those kinds of mods because the Canadian DOT has an easy solution: license the airplane as an Owner Maintained aircraft. The only problem is that the U.S. won’t allow owner-maintained aircraft to cross into the U.S. We don’t have an explanation for the dif ferences, but the ongoing successes folks are having with Chevy-powered Seabees clearly demonstrate that there are viable ways to save aircraft that are powered by boat anchor motors.

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 11

PHIL HIGH

The V-8 engine fits beautifully within the stock Seabee cowling, maintaining the classic looks of the airplane. The engine extension and the Morse chain drive enclosed in the housing are nearly identical in dimensions as the original Franklin installation. Even the radiator for the GM V-8 fits within the cowling!

When Brian looked around for solutions, he found the Lycoming GO-480 was a certified replacement, but that was as ancient as the Franklin and burned even more gas. There was at least one 0-540 converted Seabee, but that must have been done on a field approval and because he never found the paperwork for the STC. Then the obvious solution popped up.

“We were sitting around having a beer,” he says, “and my dad said, ‘You know what you really need in the airplane is a 350 Chevy,’ and that one comment got me thinking. I talked to Fred Geschwender, who had made a name for himself in converting V-8s for airplane use and had sold quite a few of his reduction units.”

Through the 70s and into the 80s, Fred Geschwender and his work with aviation V-8s was wellrespected. In fact, a number of crop duster aircraft were converted to his 351 Ford V-8s and had good success with them while operating in a harsh environment.

Brian says, “Fred suggested I get an LS-1 Chevy Corvette engine. It was all aluminum and Fred convinced me to fight the urge to modify the

12 SEPTEMBER 2012

engine. He said I should capitalize on all the testing and design work that Chevrolet had put into the engine and run it dead stock including the factory installed electronic ignition.

He also convinced me that with me being a mechanical engineer, I could, and should, design my own reduction unit. I was skeptical but started down that path anyway.

“I looked at every combination available. Gears and belts and eventually settled on Morse Hi-Vo chains, with an oil spray bar for lubrication, which is exactly what Fred had used.

Hi-Vo chains are similar to a timing chain on a car, only much bigger.

They are one of the lowest-friction, easiest to build and maintain, ways to transmit power.

“To get the CG right and get the prop back where it’s supposed to be, I needed to design a fairly long-nosed reduction housing. Fortunately, I have a lot of friends that are great mechanics or engineers and, with their help, I came up with a unit that is loosely patterned after what was on the Franklin originally, which gave no problems. I connected it to the engine through a splined adapter and the balanced, manual transmis-

sion automotive flywheel.

“Initially, I worked with a 1.68 reduction ratio, but now run a 1.98:1 because by using four blades, as with the MT prop, the diameter can be quite a bit smaller, which reduces water erosion and lets me turn the V-8 to a higher rpm on takeoff for more power and not worry about tip speeds. I looked at Hartzells but they were heavier and none were reversible like the MT was.

When Brian initially started measuring and weighing everything, he realized that the engine, complete with the reduction unit and radiator, would fit nicely inside the original cowling and was almost the same weight as the Franklin. The radiator would tuck behind the original cowling grillwork so the classic lines of the airplane wouldn’t change at all. In fact, he could mount the engine on a new 4130 steel structure that not only mounted the engine via six points, rather than four, but eliminated the wing-to-wing flexing of the original mounting system, which significantly reduced the airframe maintenance.

When he finished the conversion on his own airplane and flew it for the first time, he realized that the basic

“There have been no new Franklin engine parts built since 1950, so anyone who claims his engine is 100 percent original is kidding themselves.”

—Buzz Hale airplane had been even better than he thought it was: The infirmities of the Franklin had been camouflaging some of the airplane’s true capabilities.

“With the 84-inch three-blade to keep the prop in an efficient rpm range, on takeoff we were turning 4,400 rpm with the LS-1 for 2,600 rpm on the prop. However, with the smaller, 78-inch four-blade, we could get 5,200 rpm on the engine so we were making much more horsepower. Regardless, the LS-1 makes 320 hp for takeoff, which gives spectacular improvements. Where a stock ‘Bee takes forever to get off the water, 30-40 seconds at most weights, we’re off in less than half that and the rate of climb is doubled. It’s hard to believe it’s the same airplane.

“Since our original conversion to our own airplane, we’ve made a bunch of other changes that include using an LS-7, that is a dry sump racing engine available straight from Chevrolet’s Racing Division. It is rated at 500 hp, but we can’t use that at takeoff.

However, it is still delivering 350 hp at 10,000 feet and that’s where the drag of this old slug comes down. If you’re willing to burn the fuel, it’ll cruise at 147 mph TAS up there. Down low, it’s still a 115-mph airplane, but you can do that with only 170 hp, so the fuel burn is only about 10 gph. If you’re looking for a fast airplane, you only have to glance at a Seabee to know you need to look elsewhere.”

Although he didn’t start out wanting to be in the manufacturing busi-

ness, Brian quickly realized that the V-8 concept could be the core of an on-going business and formed Robinson V8 Power (www.V8Seabee.com) in Lindsay, Ontario. (His website has an excellent section on the current FAA rules about certifying such a conversion, and it’s not that difficult.)

Brian says, “As we got our feet wet, so to speak, and realized there were markets for this outside of the Seabees, we began building reduction units in different ratios and lengths for different applications, but we started with Seabees and that’s still our main focus. Even so, airplanes like Murphy Super Rebels and Cessna Skymasters are being converted.

Buzz Hale had one of the first Seabee conversions in the US and he says, “This is the greatest aircraft ever. It’s a camper, RV and a boat that flies and, with the new engine is so reliable it gives tremendous peace of mind. The airplane is addictive and makes you want to immediately go places with it.”

He continues, “As soon as we saw the V-8 conversion, we tracked down a derelict Seabee to convert and rebuild, but, since it was going to be a long-term project, we bought another V-8 ‘Bee to fly and are glad we did because it gives us a lot of ideas for the one we’re rebuilding. Among other things, we went to electric gear, in which a linear actuator replaces the hydraulic pump that took 27 strokes to get the gear up. Most folks in Canada convert ‘Bees to electric gear and I can see why.

“On our airplane, we’re going to a yacht-style, wood accented interior and have made it into a true flying boat. We’ve spent five years on it, making 57 modifications, and our passion has turned into a five-year obsession with every single nut and bolt.

“We’ve put 250 hours on our flying airplane, which is the equivalent of flying around the world and it has been nothing but an oil and gas airplane. Nothing has gone wrong. Because the GM engine computer is programmed with the export code for leaded fuel and uses no O2 sensors, we can run 100-octane, low-

lead as well as premium unleaded mogas. Plus, we have heat and excellent air conditioning, which is great in the summer or year-round in Florida. The mufflers make it so quiet and it runs so smooth, you’d think you were flying a turbine. Or an electric motor. It’s amazing! What’s more amazing is that I know Brian has 2,100 hours on his own airplane with no problems. Think about that, 2,100 hours! I don’t know how much more proof someone needs that the V-8 conversion concept can work.

“The Experimental-Exhibition category the airplane has to be operated in the US scares a lot of folks, but it shouldn’t. It opens up a lot of opportunities.”

The aging of the general aviation fleet is an ongoing concern for pilots and the FAA alike: As engines get older and the supply of parts gets smaller, the safety/reliability of those engines becomes problematic and the question has to be asked, “Do we ground a portion of the fleet or do we leave traditional regulatory limitations behind and seek viable alternatives?” Given the massive number of well-proven automotive engines being produced, it only seems logical that, at some point, the FAA should begin to look at those as an alternate source of power. If they don’t, the general aviation fleet will continue to decrease simply because we’re stretching the limits of certified, but ancient, engines. It would seem that seeking alternative engine sources would be in the best interest of the FAA as well as that of the general aviation flying public. Plus, the ability to burn unleaded fuel is a great environmental bonus, as well as a significant reduction in operating cost.

As Brian Robinson, along with so many others, says, “As airplanes like the Seabee begin to age out, and engines get more difficult and expensive to rebuild and maintain, the automotive conversions begin to look better and better. Just about everything about them is attractive.”

It’s hard to disagree with that argument and it’s going to become increasingly difficult to ignore.

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 13

Andrew King, Soldier of Fortune of Antique Aviation Adventure awaiting article and photos by

“I

used to move at least 600 miles every even year. In 1986, I moved to upstate New York to work with John Barker, 1988 saw me in St. Louis, while 1990 took me to Florida to work with Kermit Weeks.

1992 was the year I went to Virginia to work on Ken Hyde’s Wright Flyers. I stayed there four years, and then California in 1996-1997.

“After this last episode, I decided to be my own man.” And so spoke Andrew King, pilot and restorer— amongst other things, as you will discover—who applied his fingerprints on some of the most important projects of the last 20 years.

He continued: “You never know in advance when or what people will call upon you to fly for them. You have to keep an open mind and be ready at a moment’s notice. Being self-

14 SEPTEMBER 2012

Gilles Auliard

employed is a major advantage.”

Nonetheless, the road to independence was a long one: “I grew up not far from Old Rhinebeck. So, I was around antique airplanes since I was a little kid. I used to wash the airplanes, carry gas cans, stuff like that, until I was old enough to take my first flying lesson.

“I trained at Hampton Airfield, in New Hampshire. In 1978, it was one of the very few places you could learn on a Piper J-3. The flight school had three Cubs, three Champs, and two Cessna 170s.

“I soloed in the Cub a few months after my 16th birthday, before I learned to drive.

“I soloed my father’s Tiger Moth at 17, and, before I turned 20, I was flying the Fokker triplane during Old Rhinebeck’s weekend shows.

I participated in the 1981 to 1986

seasons, during which I also flew the Great Lakes, the Fleet and, sometimes, the Curtiss Jenny and the New Standard.”

Old Rhinebeck is probably the best school to learn how to fly tailwheel aircraft. Some of the airplanes of the collection being quite demanding, it gave Andrew a solid basis to deal with all types of antique airplanes, without mentioning a perceived legitimacy that opened a lot of doors.

While flying some fun airplanes in the summer, Andrew went to Parks Air College to complete an airplane and powerplant certificate. Hanging around Creve Coeur Airport, he met Bud Dake, who introduced him to some influential people in the antique world.

Flying pretty much all of Bud’s airplanes, including his Clipwing Monocoupe, was an added bonus.

“I also have another project that should come through, but it is still a secret.”

The synergy of those two elements started him in the business.

Following the same progression as others before him, he picked up a few delivery jobs around the country: “My first cross-country in an antique airplane was bringing back a Stampe from Manistee, Michigan, to New York state for my father. I was 19, and it was an adventure. I flew in bad weather early during the trip, had carburetor icing, ending up in a forced landing on a private strip in Michigan, but managed to make it back home.

“After Old Rhinebeck, I moved to St. Louis to work on Frank Koerner’s Monocoupe. Al Stix and John Cournoyer would buy new airplanes and would send me off to pick them up.”

Andrew continued his training with Kermit Weeks: “I did not like the Florida weather

much, but the job was great, and I flew some rare airplanes and got some neat rides, too, including in the Collings Foundation B-17 and B-24, Kermit’s Mosquito, his P-51 (a number of times), and [I] flew his very rare Stinson L-1.”

One day, John Halterman asked him if he wanted to go on an adventure. For Andrew, there was only one possible answer to such a question, and in short order, he was on his way to Alaska to pick up a Waco UPF-7 and bring it back to Creve Coeur.

The Waco had seen better days, being, according to him, the rattiest airplane he ever flew. However, it was still cruising at 100 mph and landing nicely, so it made the trip back in 36 flying hours without major incident and was a great flying experience.

Unfortunately, this dream job was cut short: “When Hurricane Andrew came through, I figured that nothing much would go on with the airplanes during the cleanup, so I went back to my parents in New York. I usually did not have a job lined up when I was moving out, but the stars were lining up pretty fast.”

Hearing that Ken Hyde was looking for somebody, he went to Virginia to work for him in 1994, learning even more about the intricacies of antique airplanes from this notoriously demanding builder.

In 1996, he went to attend to Javier’s Arango’s collection of WWI airplanes in Paso Robles, California, and Javier let him fly the Nieuport 28, SE-5a, and Fokker D-VII during that period.

Since 1997, he has been juggling his own projects with flying other people’s airplanes, but priority has been given to the latter: “I started working on the Ryan M-1 and completed it in 2001. It was a great airplane, and I went to Oshkosh with it. It probably is my proudest accomplishment.

“For the last five years, I

16 SEPTEMBER 2012

have been trying to complete a Nieuport 28, powered by a 1918 160 CV Gnome rotary engine.

“Of the most recent memorable flying experiences, the Pitcairn Autogiro comes to mind. For the last three years I have gone to Oshkosh with different airplanes.

I n 2 0 0 9 , i t w a s J a c k Ti f f a n y ’s Pitcairn, in 2010, the Fokker D . V I I I f r o m t h e Vi n t a g e A e r o Flying Museum (VAFM)—along with its Fokker Dr.1 and D.VII— and in 2011, Bob Coolbaugh’s Curtiss Pusher.

“I seem to be getting backwards in time, from 1932, to 1918, and finally 1911. To keep up with the trend I will have to take a dirigible to Oshkosh next year.

“I also recently had the opportunity to fly the oldest-flying Cessna from Poplar Grove, Illinois, to Eagles Mere, Pennsylvania, in about 10 flying hours.”

Even though these experiences would be the highlight of anybody’s logbook, Andrew’s activities are not limited to flying airplanes for his friends. He also has branched into TV commercials (General Electric, Ancestry.com), documentaries (Mission Dawn Patrol, Barnstorming, Breaking Through the Clouds), as well as fea-

ture movies. You probably are not aware that some of the very little real flying taking place in Flyboys was Andrew’s stick work.

Even television has hosted him.

In an episode aired for the 100th anniversary of flight, he was a member of the U.S. team building a pioneer-era airplane in three days with only very basic materials collected on the scrap heap, and flew it in the show Junkyard Wars. Against a French and a British team, the United States came dead last, a verdict hotly contested by Andrew.

When asked about next year’s projects, he responded in these terms: “I hope the SPAD we are building for the VAFM will be finished in 2012, and I am looking forward to displaying it at air shows.

“I also have another project that should come through, but it is still a secret.”

No matter what project Andrew is alluding to, you can be sure that it will be another stunner, as, for the people in the know, he is without doubt the number one soldier of fortune of antique aviation.

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 17

Ed Heath’s

Airplanes

Remembering Ed Heath by

Bob Whittier

Photos from EAA Archives It’s a rare aviation enthusiast who has not heard of Ed Heath and his little parasol monoplanes. However, many present-day sport flying enthusiasts know little or nothing of the Heath story. So this month we’ll do something about this state of affairs.

Edward Bayard Heath was born in Amsterdam, New York, in 1888, the son of parents prominent in that area.

As a boy he showed much interest in mechanical things. When the Wright brothers flew at Kitty Hawk in

18 SEPTEMBER 2012

December 1903, Heath was then 15 years old, and this accomplishment fascinated him. In the years that followed he read everything he could find on the subject of aviation.

His family moved to Chicago, where he graduated from high school with very good marks in the fields of mechanics and drafting. He was not fortunate enough to go to college to gain a formal education in engineering. But like many other aviation pioneers, he had an inborn

feel for how mechanical things should be built and used. And inspired by the Wrights, he had a powerful urge to design and build his own airplane.

Ed Heath did much of the testing for the Heath Super Parasol on floats at Lake Zurich, Illinois. The lake, situated northwest of Chicago and alongside one of the major roads of the area (Route 12), gave Heath and his crew an ideal location for flying the spritely seaplane.

Members of the extended Heath family still living in Amsterdam had suitable shop facilities, which they were willing to make available to Edward. He therefore moved back there from Chicago and early in 1910 set to work on his project.

His finished airplane, a wirebraced monoplane powered by a two-cylinder, horizontally opposed engine imported from Europe, made a successful flight on September 13 of that year. With it he did some exhibition flights at upstate New York fairgrounds. But, knowing that at that time the Chicago area was one of the country’s few really live centers of aviation activity, he went back there and by 1913 was proprietor of an aircraft parts and supplies house called the E.B. Heath Aerial Vehicle Company. It grew into one of the major supply houses of that time. It catered to a surprising number of people then building their own airplanes. During World War I this firm made many small parts for the rapidly expanding military airplane factories.

A f t e r t h a t w a r, H e a t h m a d e an effort to cater to the averageincome segment of the population by developing a small biplane he called the Feather and which was underpowered by a V-twin motorcycle engine. But this ship came to naught when the government started selling off surplus military planes at attractively low prices.

Therefore he became what is today called a fixed base operator, selling flight services, doing aircraft maintenance work, and shipping parts and supplies to barnstorming pilots all over the country.

But the urge to design and build airplanes was strong in him, and in 1923 he constructed the Favorite, an open-cockpit biplane that somehow managed to fly its pilot and four passengers on the muscle of a 90-hp Curtiss OX-5 engine.

Heath fully realized the value of smart and effective public relations work. In the pursuit of publicity, therefore, he got into the activity of building and flying small racing

On floats, wheels or skis, the Heath Parasol promised economical flying for anyone willing to put the time and effort into its construction. The diminutive size of the airplane did limit its performance with pilots who did not match Ed Heath’s small stature. planes. This culminated in the famous little Baby Bullet, which was so wellconceived and carefully streamlined that it scooted along at a claimed 150 mph on the 32 hp developed by an English Bristol Cherub opposed-twin engine. In these efforts he was assisted

by Claire Linstedt, a trained engineer he had employed.

Still of course quite interested in an “everyman’s airplane,” Heath heeded a suggestion made by a wellknown naval architect, magazine editor, and aviation enthusiast named Weston Farmer of Minnesota. Why not take a pair of readily available straight-four Henderson motorcycle engines? Could it be the dreamed-of everyman’s airplane?

The result appeared late in 1925 in the form of what Heath decided to name the Parasol, after the overhead mounting of the wing. It flew—but not very satisfactorily. The “Tommy” wings had a thin airfoil section typical of the 1918 period. They didn’t lift very well when pulled along by the engine developing only about 25 to 27 hp.

At that time the recently developed Clark Y airfoil was attracting more and more attention on the part of airplane designers. Of thicker section, it was able to develop more lift while not having too much more drag. So the Heath shop constructed a new wing using it, and Heath was pleased to find that it usefully improved his little ship’s flying ability. He thus named the improved craft the Super Parasol.

S i m u l t a n e o u s l y, m u c h experimenting was done to make the Henderson engine reasonably able to stand the lugging stresses put onto

it by the high-speed running typical of flight. This included such things as reworking the lube system so it would feed to the bearings a generous supply of oil under adequate pressure, assuring adequate cooling of the castiron cylinders that had integral heads and skimpy cooling fins and solving valve-burning problems.

In 1928 Heath was approached by a smart, imaginative advertising man name Cliff Edwards. This fellow proposed an arrangement in which Heath would give him free flight instruction in exchange for free help with advertising and promotion.

The two made a very effective team!

When the stock market crashed in 1929 and brought on a deep business depression, Heath found himself blessed with an appealing low-cost airplane, a two-story brick manufacturing facility on Sedgewick Street in Chicago, and the services of a live-wire ad man. This he saw as the way to save his firm from being killed by the depression.

Exciting advertising soon began to appear in male-oriented magazines.

Imaginative, flashy color schemes on his planes attracted the attention of media photographers. Wins in air races for small planes were loudly publicized. And this was at a time when Young America was still extremely air-minded as a result of Lindbergh’s epochal flight from New York to Paris in 1927.

To c o a x t h e u n d e c i d e d a n d impecunious to get started on a Super Parasol, kits of materials for various components were offered at attractively low prices. The one for constructing the tail surfaces cost only

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 19

Over Ed Heath’s objections to the design, company officials decided they needed to offer a low wing model. Sadly, during a test flight one of the struts on the right side failed and the resulting crash from 1,500 feet cost Ed Heath his life.

Ed Heath waves to the camera as he makes a low pass over the surface of Lake Zurich in northern Illinois. $9.72, steel tubing and wires for the fuselage frame were only $28.45, and four Sitka spruce wing spars, already drilled for bolt holes, cost a mere $8.

It’s hard to say how many Parasols were completed and flown. Perhaps something in the low to middle hundreds. By following a procedure, one could get identification numbers to paint on the wings and rudder from the old Bureau of Air Commerce, which would allow a homebuilt to be flown legally. But many Parasols were probably flown without them in remote places, and thus cannot be counted.

To raise capital, Heath Airplane Company became Heath Aircraft Corp.

A mid-wing version of the ship was offered, which flew well and earned a good reputation among pilots. Around

20 SEPTEMBER 2012

1930 an increasing number of lowwing planes were appearing. For racing planes this layout offered favorable geometry for wire-braced monoplane wings. For faster commercial types, low-wings offered a way to get wide, stable, and low-drag landing gears.

But somehow people got the notion that for some obscure reason or other, low-wings were inherently faster than high-wings.

This led some in the Heath Aircraft Corp. to insist, for reasons of sales appeal, that the company must develop and introduce a low-wing model. Heath was strongly opposed to this, because the wing struts on such a layout would be under compression and subject to failure by buckling.

But company politics insisted, such a ship was built, and during a test-flying

maneuver, sure enough, struts on the right side buckled, and the resulting descent from 1,500 feet and crash brought an end to Ed Heath’s life in February of 1931.

He was the spark plug of the Heath company. Without him, it faltered and was sold to interests in Michigan.

In 1932, new owners of the firm introduced a new model Parasol called the LNB-4. It was an entirely new design. Span was increased to 31 feet 3 inches. While it thus had a better wing aspect ratio, it worked out to weigh more than did the Super Parasols, and so when fitted with the Heath B-4 engine the power loading turned out to be a heavy 28 pounds per hp.

Rate of climb was thus like that of the proverbial ruptured duck. When fitted with the then-new 37-hp Continental A-40 engine, this model as well as the mid-wing version proved to have acceptable performance.

Today, it happens that people come across old literature on the Heaths, take a fancy to one or another model, and get the itch to start building. Our advice has to be a firm, “Don’t do it!” Ed Heath was only 5 feet tall and weighed 110 pounds. The Super Parasol’s cockpit was only 18 inches wide, and that of the LN was 21 inches. A J-3 Cub’s cockpit is 26 inches wide, and if you find it cramped, you can understand why a Heath would be very tight indeed. A cockpit that’s hard to get into can be dangerously hard to get out of in a hurry in the event of a fire or an accident. Where today would you find a truly airworthy Heath B-4 engine? We can go on at length like this. You’d be much better off undertaking something like a VW-powered Pober Pixie, or one of the all-wood designs offered

by Rag Wing Aircraft Designs of South Carolina, or any number of modern designs for parasol-wing monoplanes available today.

In closing, although Ed Heath’s “ever yman’s airplane” venture was short-lived, we must pay him homage because it did so much to keep alive and advance the idea of homebuilt airplanes.

Light Plane Heritage published in EAA Experimenter DECEMBER 1994

the hows and whys of aircraft tubing by

Bob Whittier EAA 1235

At EAA fly-ins of the 1950s and 1960s, practically all the homebuilt planes were built from plans and raw materials purchased from various sources. Today, a steadily growing percentage of the homebuilts at these gatherings have been assembled from kits.

It is to be acknowledged t h a t t h e r e ’s m e r i t i n k i t s .

When builders buy a kit from a reputable company, people having much enthusiasm but scant aeronautical experience are usually assured that everything going into their homebuilt aircraft is of approved aeronautical quality. Also, builders save much time and aggravation by ordering kits from one source instead of searching far afield for the many different materials needed to construct an airplane.

On the other hand, when one buys a kit, one pays for the time and effort someone else has put into buying the material it contains, shaping the parts, and marketing the resulting kits. Nevertheless, when we consider the prices of kits for even the simpler ultralight aircraft, the thought comes that even such aircraft can seem quite costly to those who can fly only a modest number of hours per year.

With a little searching, one can still find and buy plans for homebuilt aircraft designed three, four, or more decades ago. People are even building Pietenpols designed more than 60 years ago. Whatever one might think of its antiquated ap-

state-of-the-art designs. At the same time, would-be “eyeball engineers” find it steadily more difficult to find aircraft design literature slanted to their needs and levels of education.

It becomes obvious on walking around at a major fly-in that many of the people present are under 50 years of age.

Most of these folks have had little if any contact with the basic airplane design literature published between 1920 and 1940. That literature, because it dealt with simpler, slower airplanes, is still useful today. But, we still see fewer and fewer new designs created by modern equivalents of Bernie Pietenpol, Ed Heath, Les Long, and O.G. Corben. That is something for all of us to be concerned about, because it means we are drifting away from the word experimental in the name Experimental Aircraft Association.

The purpose of this article, therefore, is to give younger readers some exposure to what went on before they were born, and to encourage all readers to do some serious thinking about the homebuilt aircraft field.

Let’s take aircraft tubing as a good subject for discussion. We have come to take steel tubing for

Few indeed realize what a specialized and sophisticated material aircraft steel tubing is. pearance and rather heavy weight, the Pietenpol remains a very practical design for enthusiasts who want a simple, fun plane that can be built from raw materials using common home workshop tools.

Why are there no plans for updated versions of simple sport planes such as the Pietenpol, Heath Parasol, and Baby Ace? A likely answer is that today, people fortunate enough to have training in aeronautical engineering prefer to use their knowledge to produce modern,

Editor’s Note: The Light Plane Heritage series in EAA’s Experimenter magazine often touched on aircraft and concepts related to vintage aircraft and their history. Since many of our members have not had the opportunity to read this series, we plan on publishing those LPH articles that would be of interest to VAA members. Enjoy!—HGF

22 SEPTEMBER 2012

Low-cost tubing for non-aeronautical use is manufactured rapidly from strips of sheet steel called “skelp.” Skelp width is chosen to suit diameter to be made. Rollers curl it into tubular shape and electric-weld the seam automatically. Other rollers make it acceptably round and straight. granted. We order it as matter of fact as we go shopping for groceries. We know how to cut it and weld it together into airframes, but we don’t know how to think about it because we know nothing about its background and how it’s made.

Few indeed realize what a specialized and sophisticated material aircraft steel tubing is. On one hand, it is very carefully manufactured to strict government specifications.

On the other hand, the market for it is very small compared to that for other steel products. Actually, it is as much of a custom-made product as is a fine shotgun barrel or a hand-made sword.

This is reflected in the prices asked for it today. In a 1964 aircraft supplies catalog, we find that the widely used 5/8-inch diameter by 0.035-inch wall thickness size sold for 42 cents per foot. Today we find it listed at $1.79 in one supply catalog and $2.31 in another. Threequarter-inch by 0.035-inch tubing that was 46 cents in 1964 is now

$1.87 and $2.38.

For the sake of spurring you to do some thinking, let’s look into wood briefly. The longerons of Pietenpols are 1 inch square in cross section. One current catalog lists a rough blank of Sitka spruce spar stock measuring 1 inch by 6 inches by 16 feet at $130. It can be sawn into five 1-inch longeron strips totaling 80 feet. This works out to 61.5 cents per foot.

Before you exclaim, “But I don’t want to build a homely Pietenpol!” think of the sleek, cantileverwinged, all-wood Jodel, Druine, Piel, Jurca, and other homebuilt designs popular in Europe in the 1950-1970 period and also built from plans in North America. And, we shouldn’t forget that the FAA approves of the use of substitute woods such as Douglas fir and western hemlock, provided they meet aircraft standards of quality.

Hemlock, for example, can be substituted for Sitka spruce without changes in the size of materials be-

ing used. Currently it’s being sold at a price of $2 per board foot in some parts of the country, which is significantly less than the cost of spruce. Pine is being successfully used in some modern ultralights.

Look into lumberyard prices for such woods and start thinking!

Now let’s get back to steel. In olden times very useful implements were made of iron heated in burning charcoal. The iron absorbed carbon from the fuel such as to create a steely surface on that metal. By early in the 19th century Europeans had cut down so much of their forest land for fuel, lumber, and shipbuilding that they were forced to look to coal and iron.

This was especially true of the island-dwelling British, who depended on merchant and naval ships for survival. The rapid growth of railroads from 1825 onward required the building of many new bridges able to stand the weight and pounding of trains. Mortar crumbled in stonework bridges,

Seamless steel tubing is made by feeding a red-hot bar through a roller-and-mandrel process that pierces it. This thick, rough tube is then repeatedly pulled through a die-and-mandrel process that colddraws it into finished tubing. These sketches convey the general idea; modern production machines are very sophisticated.

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 23

Streamline and square aircraft tubing is made by drawing round tubing through suitably shaped dies. Rounded trailing edge of streamlined tubing is necessary to avoid bending the metal to too sharp a radius. In addition to having better streamline form, frontal area is also reduced. For example, 2-inch diameter round tubing makes streamline tubing only 1.143 inches on its short axis. Drawing at top right shows how round tubing was sometimes streamlined with light wood fairing. Can any readers tell us what kind of machine, cutters, and techniques airplane factories used to shape the wood as shown? Lower right—some lightplanes have used less-expensive streamlined wing strut tubing made with an electric welding process; note more pointed trailing edge. and joints in wooden ones loosened under the shaking. Wooden bridges also caught fire or rotted, so bridge builders turned to metal.

At first cast iron was used, that being the only metal available in large quantities. Because it was weak in tension, bridge builders used the principle of the arch to design bridges in which the iron was under compression. As train weights and speeds increased, they turned to tougher wrought iron to make bridges that were both stronger and longer. This led them to switch from arch-type bridges to ones built of truss work. In these bridges, some members were under compression while others were under tension.

The vastness of North America spurred interest in railroads here, too. On both sides of the Atlantic men who were very well-trained in mathematics developed methods of analyzing stresses in truss work.

For example, in 1847 the mathematician Squire Whipple of Utica, New York, published a book that for the first time accurately analyzed stresses in truss work. In 1858, Professor W.J.M. Rankine of the University of Glasgow in Scotland published a 670-page book, Applied Mechanics, that became a

24 SEPTEMBER 2012

standard manual for engineers of all disciplines up to the 1920s.

All of this is of interest to airplane people today because we use the types of truss work and the methods of analyzing them originated by 19th century railroad bridge builders. Few books on aviation history mention this, but it’s a fact that early airplane designers had this mass of knowledge at their disposal when learning how to make airframes that were both strong and light. Some made use of it, and others didn’t.

During the 1840s the Englishman James Warren created and patented the Warren truss, which has been used for the fuselage truss work in such aircraft as the Fleet trainer, the Taylor and the Piper Cubs, and the Heath LN Parasol of the early 1930s. Also in the 1840s, American bridge designers William Howe and Thomas Pratt developed their trusses. Both were originally used in wooden bridges laced together with wrought iron tie rods.

As used in bridges, the Howe truss consisted of stout upper and lower longitudinals, and of verticals with crisscrossed iron tie rods between adjoining uprights. This truss was practically universal in wood-andwire aircraft from 1903 through

World War I and into the early 1920s. In fuselages, we call the upper and lower longitudinal members longerons, and the vertical and horizontal cross-members simply struts or tubes.

The introduction in 1856 of the Bessemer process for producing steel in large quantities opened the gates to the use of this muchstronger metal in a wide variety of applications and made possible tall but strong steel-framed buildings, much longer bridges, and you-name-it. By 1880 it was in general use.

Steam engines freed industry from the limited number of sites where dams could be built to operate water wheels. The Industrial Revolution picked up speed with incredible swiftness.

Short lengths of tubing and piping had been made in antiquity by wrapping sheet lead around mandrels and melting the edges together.

Copper tubing began to be made in a similar way, except that the seams were sealed by brazing. Iron pipe came to be made by wrapping red-hot metal around mandrels and hammering the overlapping edges to fuse-weld them together.

It occurred to a German steelmaker, Reinhold Mannesmann,

Drawing 1 shows 1924 Lincoln Sport. Its fuselage used the Howe truss, in which the wooden parts are tied into a rigid structure by crisscrossed wires.

Drawing 2 shows railroad bridges using Warren (top) and Pratt (bottom) trusses. Warren was ample for shorter spans or rivers having no marine traffic. Manner in which it hung from abutments led into the zigzag truss work. Pratt suited longer spans or rivers carrying marine traffic.

Top girder could be located as high as necessary for a strong truss and to clear locomotive smokestacks, and no part hung below abutment level. Bridge designers developed methods of stress analysis later adopted for aircraft. Drawing 3 is EAA Biplane fuselage using Pratt truss. Drawing 4 is a Warren truss steel tube fuselage designed as an alternative to the Pietenpol’s original wooden fuselage. that seamless steel tubing would be much stronger and safer for use in the boilers that generated steam for engines. He thought about the problem for many years and in 1885 patented a process he developed. It made use of two steel rollers set at an angle to one another.

These rollers fed a red-hot steel bar into a pointed steel mandrel that pierced it, thereby converting it into a rough, thick-walled tube.

Passage through more rollers made this tube thinner and longer.

The resulting still somewhat thick-walled and rough tubes were then processed in another machine using a die-and-mandrel setup that controlled inside and outside diameters precisely, thus producing the desired wall thickness as well as smooth surfaces. This cold-working also increased the metal’s strength.

The tubing we use in aircraft construction is made this way.

Making it is highly specialized and

calls for much skill and care, plus frequent inspections as the process moves along. Much effort has gone into refining the technique so as to produce the strongest, safest tubing possible. It is therefore fundamentally quite labor-intensive, and this is reflected in the price.

In the past, the steel used was made with both the open-hearth and the electric furnace methods.

Today the latter is used, because it uses electric current instead of fuel.

The objection to the open-hearth furnace is that conducting a fuel such as gas or oil into the heating chamber can bring in impurities.

Bits of material such as sand or slag that find their way into new steel can lead to flaws in finished tubing.

As the originally short, rough tubes move through the drawing process, they are inspected for embedded flakes and slivers of metal that could also become worked-in flaws. The tubes are put through

acid baths to remove scale, then dried and coated with graphite or other lubricant before being put into the drawing machine.

The die and mandrel are precision made from very hard steel.

The drawing machine’s moving draw-head has a jaw that grips one end of the raw tube, which is flattened for this purpose. Operators must be well-trained to do this work. For example, they must be constantly on the alert for foreign matter on the die and mandrel, which could produce scratches or grooves in the tubing.

If the feed rate is too fast, crosswise cracks from too-vigorous pulling might result. Despite the use of lubricant, dies and mandrels wear rapidly due to the high pressures involved. Government specifications for aircraft tubing allow a modest wall-thickness tolerance to allow for this. When tools become worn too much to draw tubes that

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 25

Top: 1925-1930 Travel Air fuselages like this were made of steel tubing in a manner pioneered by Fokker. Forward two bays used the Pratt truss. Welded-in diagonal tubes resisted loosening under engine and landing gear forces. Remainder of the bays used the Howe truss. Welding was simplified and the crisscrossed wires were lighter than the thick 1025 steel tubing used up forward. Lower left: Fokker method used quadrants of smalldiameter tubing as attach points. Simple to weld to the primar y structure, and easy to lace brace wires into place. Center: These quadrants did have shortcomings. The welds were under tension, not good practice, and the quadrants could distort under heavy load. Right: Improved design puts the welds more under shear, washers minimize distortion, and this type of lug readily accepts the fork ends of turnbuckles.

are within these tolerances, they are reworked and used to produce tubing of another size.

Because cold-drawing hardens the steel, it has to be annealed before passing through each subsequent draw-down. The smaller, thinner-walled sizes of tubing of the sizes used in aircraft may go through the drawing-down process a score of times before reaching finished size. As we said, making aircraft tubing is a laborintensive process.

Because the mandrel pushes its point through the inside of a tube, there is no way to control its travel precisely. If it wanders, a tube can result that has unequal wall thickness at various points. Because thin spots can burn through exasperatingly easily when tubing is being welded, and can collapse easily under stress when in service, test spec-

26 SEPTEMBER 2012

imens are taken out of each batch of tubes for inspection. Some specimens are also pull-tested. A short length of defective aircraft tubing can kill people, so thorough inspection is essential. Quality control is therefore emphasized. Tubes used for testing can’t be sold and don’t bring a profit.

The cold-drawing process tends to produce slightly bowed tubes.

So the straightness of each tube is checked by experienced personnel by rolling it on a very true flat surface. Thicker tubing can stand passage through a straightening machine, but thinner tubing of the kind used in small aircraft construction is more delicate and so is carefully hand-straightened by skilled personnel.

Streamlined and square seamless tubing is made by drawing round tubing through suitably shaped

dies. The additional processing thus involved increases the cost of these shapes. Several years ago the only firm making streamline tubing in the United States had so much trouble with cracks occurring at the trailing edge of streamlined tubing that it purchased sophisticated testing equipment. Its cost had to be added to the selling price of this product.

Low-cost tubing used in a vast array of non-aeronautical applications is made in a different way.

Drums containing long, narrow strips of sheet metal are loaded into a forming machine. This material is called “skelp,” and its width is chosen to suit the diameter of tubing to be made. Grooved rollers bend the flat skelp into tubular form and electric-weld the seam. More rollers shape the tubing into a perfectly round form and straighten it.

Because skelp is a form of sheet metal produced in volume by rolling mills, it is low in cost and quite uniform in wall thickness. Welded tubing is not used in aircraft frames because the electric weld line is assumed to be a weak place where compression loads could readily cause it to buckle. Its use for aircraft has been investigated in the past, but so far it is still not accepted.

However, automatic electric welding equipment has undergone continuous improvement and might be worth investigating. Study the nice weld lines in modern electric conduit and auto exhaust piping.

One can’t say anything about airplanes without someone interjecting, “Yes, but…!” Welded tubing actually has been used in aircraft. Early models of the Taylor and Piper Cub used streamlined wing strut material made by welding. Suitable strips of sheet steel were presumably bent around some sort of form to produce the stream-

line shape, and welded together at the trailing edge. Look at the struts of older Cubs in museums and at fly-ins and you will see that instead of being rounded as with seamless tubing, the trailing edge is flat and about 1/8-inch wide.

This tubing was made 50 and 60 years ago by firms in Michigan and Ohio, but our efforts to trace them or their successors have been fruitless. We showed a Taylor Cub E-2 strut to friends having mechanical and engineering backgrounds, and they agreed that electric welding must have been used. The heat of gas welding would have caused great difficulty with warping.

The reason why welded tubing was acceptable in this application is that the streamline section is quite rigid on its longitudinal axis, and jury struts stiffened the wing struts on the section’s shorter transverse axis by reason of being attached to them midway between their ends.

It had acceptable buckling strength.

The Howe truss used in woodand-wire fuselages worked, but had shortcomings. Much fussy work went into making the many steel fittings needed to tie together the longerons and many cross members. Bolts used to secure them in place usually required that holes be drilled through the wooden longerons, thus creating weak spots.

Much patient fiddling with the turnbuckles used with the crosswires was needed to pull a fuselage frame into alignment. Engine vibration and the bumps of landing and taxiing in time loosened up the many crosswires.

A number of early builders tried steel tubing, employing the then widely used Howe truss. A welded joint where tubes came together was quicker to make, and if done properly would never loosen up.

One early user of tubing was Anthony Fokker. As a youth in Holland in 1910, he became swept up in the craze for aviation. This led

Aircraft Finishing Products STC’d for Certified Aircraft

Safe for You, Safe for the World, Safe for Your Airplane

For Certified Aircraft, Stewart Systems is FAA approved for use with any certified fabric.

Superflite, Ceconite or Polyfiber us Non azardo -Fla Non-H mm able ant li p m o C A EP Stewart Aircraft Finishing Systems 5500 Sullivan St., Cashmere, WA 98815 1-888-356-7659 • (1-888-EKO-POLY) www.stewartsystems.aero

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 27

him to go to Germany to take an aviation course. In time he gravitated to Johannisthal airfield outside Berlin, then a hotbed of aviation activity.

There he met a welder, Reinhold Platz, and in 1912 the two built a steel-tube fuselage for a new Fokker monoplane. Since Mannesmann had devised a way to make seamless tubing, we can guess that they used it and that it was some kind of weldable mild steel. A crosssectional drawing sent to us by the Museum fur Verkehr und Technik in Berlin shows that during World War I the Germans were using seamless steel tubing for airplane struts. An advertisement in Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft for 1918 shows the British were also making round and streamline tubing. One book indicates the reason we see less tubing in British World War I aircraft is that the alloys they then had did not weld acceptably.

When war broke out in 1914, everyone thought it would be over in a few months. The tiny Fokker shop being much in need of business, Fokker demonstrated his monoplane to the German army and got a modest order.

Then it became evident that the war showed signs of dragging on.

One thing led to another, and by 1918 and at the ripe age of 28, Fokker had become a major aircraft manufacturer. However, he had scant loyalty to the German nation and when the war ended managed to smuggle many of his formidable D.VII biplanes to Holland. Some found their way to the United States, and the Army Air Service research facility at McCook Field in Ohio studied them thoroughly both in the air and on the ground.

Researchers realized the superiority of the Fokker type of welded steel tube fuselage. Accordingly they had one U.S. aircraft manufacturer build several fuselages of this material to replace the wooden ones of some of their de Havilland 4 biplanes. These fuselages proved to be lighter, stron-

28 SEPTEMBER 2012

ger, and more durable.

The Army therefore obtained a supply of aircraft grade tubing and parceled it out to various aircraft manufacturers to use in new designs. And this is how American designers and builders came to adopt welded steel tubing construction. A tip of the hat to Tony Fokker!

Researchers realized the superiority of the Fokker type of welded steel tube fuselage.

It appears that the now-standard SAE 4130 chrome molybdenum tubing did not come into general use until about 1926 to 1928.

Around 1925 various manufacturers of civilian airplanes started making welded steel tube fuselages using, for the most part, a general purpose type of mechanical tubing bearing the 1025 specification number. We call it carbon steel to distinguish it from chromoly.

Where the longerons of a fuselage made of 4130 might be 3/4inch in diameter and have a wall thickness of 0.035 inch, one made of the weaker 1025 would use stock of 7/8-inch diameter and 0.049-inch wall thickness. Use of 4130 made possible a significant reduction in weight. However, the 1025 had advantages for its time.

The greater wall thickness made it easier for inexperienced welders to handle, for there was less tendency for hot spots to burn through.

Barnstormers found it reasonably easy to find wherever they might

be, to make repairs after crackups.

The wall thickness afforded good resistance to rusting-through. This is why many 1920s airplanes have survived to be restored and displayed at fly-ins.

Built early in 1927, Lindbergh’s Spirit of St. Louis used 1020 tubing for its fuselage and the wing struts.

Taylor and Piper Cubs used 4130 tubing for the more highly stressed fuselage members such as the longerons, and 1025 for lower-stressed members such as diagonals and cross tubes, particularly aft of the cockpit area.

The introduction of 4130 at a time when 1025 was in wide use created a problem for factories. It was easy for someone to mistakenly use a length of weaker 1025 in a location where 4130 was called for.

Because manufacturing processes are the same for both grades, 1025 didn’t cost all that much less than 4130, and it passed from the scene.

It saved a worthwhile number of dollars only when a large number of planes were being made. Today we use 4130 for both new construction and repair work.

The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) long ago devised a fournumber code for identifying the many kinds of alloy steel that have been developed for almost endless applications. The number 1025 means carbon steel (1) containing no alloying metal (0) and 0.25 percent (25) of carbon. The number 4130 indicates a steel containing molybdenum to enhance the homogeneity of the alloy and reduce grain size, and chromium to impart hardness, strength, and resistance to wear and corrosion.

Finished 4130 aircraft tubing is heated to between 1,500 and 1,600 degrees F to “normalize” it. This relieves internal strain and refines the grain structure. This process gives aircraft tubing its characteristic blue-black color.

Next month we’ll have more to say about steel tubing, and take up the subjects of aluminum tubing and welding.

VINTAGE BOOKS OF INTEREST Bob Fogg and New Hampshire’s Golden Age of Aviation: Flying Over Winnipesaukee and Beyond

by Jane Rice review by

I

t ’s f u n n y h o w o n e s m a l l artifact, something that a family may have had for years, will trigger years of research. Such is the case with Jane Rice’s book Bob Fogg and New Hampshire’s Golden Age of Aviation. In the family garage in Laconia, New Hampshire, hung a fingerboard sign, the kind you used to see hanging on a bracket as it pointed the way to a local business. (See the photo.) That simple sign pointed back to a time during the golden age of aviation when seaplanes were part of the local environment, and the pilots of those airplanes helped grow the local economy.

R i c e ’s g r a n d f a t h e r, T h o m a s E.P. Rice, was Bob Fogg’s business partner in 1936-38, as he ser ved as the president of the Winnipesaukee Air Service. Bob Fogg brought the first airplane owned by a New Hampshire resident to Concord in 1920 and began hopping passengers. Soon he started a seaplane base at the We i r s , a n d i t b e c a m e a m a j o r tourist attraction there. Between 1923 and 1938 he and his pilots flew more than 50,000 passengers over the lakes and mountains of New Hampshire’s Lakes Region, as

H.G. Frautschy

well as delivering the “first aeromarine mail service in America” in 1925. He gave many future aviators their first flying lessons, including New Hampshire’s first female pilot, Dorothy Putnam, and also hit the headlines himself on several occasions when he flew newsreel cameras to the landing sites of famous trans-Atlantic flights.

While a regional history, Bob Fogg’s interactions with many of the aviation luminaries of the day highlight his high level of activity within aviation, not only as a pilot, but also as a local leader, who later lent his expertise in aviation operations to the nation during World War II. Fogg and the men and women who lived and flew in New England are beautifully woven into this history of the area in a book that is interesting not only to those who have enjoyed this gorgeous part of New England, but also to anyone who likes reading about the aviation decade that was the 1930s.

I n a d d i t i o n t o M s . R i c e ’s outstanding text, the book is profusely illustrated with photos of the aircraft of the era that flew in the area, including several

photos of Beech Staggerwings on floats, as well as Wright biplanes on floats, Wacos, and a Sikorsky S-38, among others. The 200-page book is ver y nicely composed and laid out, as well, a credit not only to the author, but also to the publisher, Peter E. Randall.

The book is available from: Enfield Publishing and Distribution PO Box 699, Enfield, NH 03748 Tel: 603-632-7377 E-mail: info@enfieldbooks.com Published by Peter E. Randall Publisher LLC. Portsmouth, NH Tel: 603-431-5667 www.perpublisher.com

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 29

Vintage Instructor THE

BY Steve Krog, CFI

Some rules of thumb for vintage pilots On June 1, 2012, the FAA enacted a new set of guidelines to be used by flight examiners when administering an oral/ flight test for a new or an advanced rating. The new guidelines are quite different than when most of us first took our private or commercial pilot checkrides. Remember having a two-way discussion during the oral portion of the test between you and the examiner, where he or she asked you a number of questions about regulations, airspace, and the airplane you were intending to fly? Most everything was done in a friendly question-and-answer format.

The new guidelines that the examiner must now abide by involve “scenario” based situations. For those of you old enough to remember doing what we called “story” problems in grade school math, the new testing format follows a similar path. Here’s an example: Your best friend has asked you to fly him to a location about 200 miles away where his elderly mother has taken ill. You’ll need to leave at sunrise tomorrow and return the same day as your friend can only get one day off work. The nearest airport to his sickly mother is a private turf strip about 2,000 feet long. What actions or steps will you take to make a safe flight?

That’s simple, you might be thinking. A check on the weather outlook for the next day indicates that it will be CAVU (ceiling and visibility unrestricted), surface winds light and variable, but the temperature will be a “warm” 95°F. It should be a beautiful day for the round-trip flight.

Later that evening, after looking over your sectional maps, a very small stomach knot has developed. You call your friend back and ask what he knows about the private turf strip. His response is, “Don’t worry about it. The old fellow who owns the strip always keeps it mowed and flies from the strip on a regular basis.” All seems to be in order and you settle in for a good night’s sleep in preparation for the trip.

Early the next morning you meet your friend at the hangar. He’s anxious to get going, checking his watch every minute or so while you attempt to do a thorough preflight inspection. Your friend’s impatience wears on you, so rather than getting an updated briefing for your route of flight, you decide to get airborne. After all, the forecast was for perfect weather all day.

Once in the air and level at a comfortable, smooth altitude, both you and your friend relax and settle back for

30 SEPTEMBER 2012

a good flight. Twenty minutes into your one and one-half hour planned flight you notice the ammeter is not showing a charge. In fact, it seems to be indicating a slight discharge. “No problem,” you think to yourself. Just shut all electrical items off for now and check things out once on the ground at your destination. It’s a simple flight and can easily be flown using pilotage only.

Ten minutes later the horizon ahead of you seems to be disappearing, and it looks awfully dark beyond. Five minutes later you have determined that a line of thunderstorms has developed, and you’ll have to deviate 30-40 miles off your route of flight in order to avoid the impending thunderstorm. And you wonder, “Where did that come from?

It was supposed to be clear all day!” Ah, the briefer did say there was a near stationary cold front well beyond your destination and shouldn’t be a problem unless it begins to move. Apparently, it has begun to move, and you scramble around looking at your map trying to pick out landmarks that will help you find your way around the storm.

Twenty-five more minutes later you’ve been able to get around the end of the line of storms and begin to turn back on a course to your destination. However, the air is now quite rough, and your passenger indicates that he might need to cough up his breakfast real soon. Quick, you know that you have a sick sack or two in the plane, but where did they get placed?

An uneasy two or three minutes later, a sick sack has been located and your passenger has buried his face in it. So far, so good. It is only another 40 minutes, more or less, to your destination.

Then your passenger decides to fill the sick sack with his early morning breakfast of scrambled eggs, bacon, toast, juice, and coffee. The stench rapidly fills the cockpit, and your stomach begins to churn. Fresh air vents are opened to the maximum, and you begin breathing through your mouth to prevent the smell from entering your nose and further churning your stomach.

Finally, after what seems like several uncomfortable hours but has only been about 45 minutes, the private airstrip comes into view. While reducing power and beginning a slow descent, you notice that every square inch of the earth’s surface seems to be wet with large water puddles standing everywhere.

You begin wondering what condition the private turf strip might be in with all of the visible standing water.

What if there is water on the strip? How soft will it be? You know you can easily land in 2,000 feet, but the runway surface may be cause for making something other than a normal approach and landing.

With several long, deep breaths to regain your composure and hide the uncertainty and growing stomach knot, you decide to make one low pass down the runway to look it over before landing.

Much to your relief the runway looks dry enough to land on, but two new problems have arisen. It appears the grass is somewhat long, and there is a big flatbed wagon filled with hay bales sitting on one end.

Mind racing, how much distance is needed to land this airplane on wet turf? The taller grass should slow the airplane down, but then there is the wagonload of hay bales to contend with. The remains of what once was a windsock favor a landing over the wagon, but then you’d have to make an obstacle short-field landing on a turf strip of unknown condition.

While making the go-around after inspecting the runway, you begin trying to recall some of the performance factors for the airplane. Let’s see now, a normal landing with little or no wind takes about 1,000 feet, and the tall grass will slow the plane down quite a bit, won’t it? A downwind landing will also add to the landing distance.

Now is not the time to think about what should have been done in advance of the flight! Rather, it’s time to calm down and think through the situation, even though your passenger is getting fidgety and begins asking a lot of foolish questions.

Turning final for the planned long, low, and slow downwind approach, all seems to be going good until you spot the barbwire fence on the approach end of the runway.

Adding a little power to clear the fence has caused an increase of 5 mph airspeed.

Once clear of the fence, power is reduced to idle, and the airplane floats before touching down. Hard application on the brake pedals doesn’t help, and the airplane now wants to skid to the right side of the runway. Keeping the wing out of the tall corn, you firmly tap and release the brakes. The hay wagon looms larger in the windshield by the second, but finally the airplane comes to a stop with 100 feet to spare.

After your passenger deplanes and leaves to visit his ill mother, you have time to take several more deep breaths and think about all of the situations you’ve encountered in the past two hours—and how they could have been prevented!

First, an updated weather briefing is a must. Conditions significantly changed in the 12 hours between your briefing and departure. Second, it would have been wise to contact the airstrip owner and learn of the surface conditions. Had the owner known you were coming, he may well have cut the grass and moved the hay wagon.

Third, when flying to a short airstrip, it would be very

wise to review the performance charts for your airplane. In the case of vintage airplanes, this precise information may not be published. However, there are some very simple “rules of thumb” that all pilots should know.

Landing on wet turf airstrips, even if the grass is tall (10 inches), will increase the landing distance by up to 30 percent. Landing with a tail wind of 10 percent of liftoff speed will increase the landing distance by 20 percent. An easier, more general way to remember this is to add 20 percent to the landing distance for every 5 mph of tail wind. For every 1 mph above the recommended landing speed, add 100 feet to the landing distance.

Using the above described scenario, here is what the pilot should have calculated: If liftoff speed is 60 mph and the tail wind is 6 mph, and normal landing distance is 1,200 feet, add at least another 240 feet for the landing distance. The wet grass will add another 30 percent to the calculated landing distance, so add another 360 feet. Adding a bit of power to clear the fence added 5 mph to the approach speed, which converts to an additional 500 feet of needed runway.

1,000 feet + 200 feet + 300 feet + 500 feet = 2,000 feet The flight described here ended uneventfully, thankfully. However, the pilot in this example may well have opted to land somewhere else, preventing a lot of unneeded anxiety.

AERO CLASSIC “COLLECTOR SERIES”

Vintage Tires New USA Production Show off your pride and joy with a fresh set of Vintage Rubber. These newly minted tires are FAA-TSO’d and speed rated to 120 MPH. Some things are better left the way they were, and in the 40’s and 50’s, these tires were perfectly in tune to the exciting times in aviation.

Not only do these tires set your vintage plane apart from the rest, but also look exceptional on all General Aviation aircraft. Deep 8/32nd tread depth offers above average tread life and UV treated rubber resists aging.

First impressions last a lifetime, so put these jewels on and bring back the good times..…

New General Aviation Sizes Available:

500 x 5, 600 x 6, 700 x 8

Desser has the largest stock and selection of Vintage and Warbird tires in the world. Contact us with your requirements.

Telephone: 800-247-8473 or 323-721-4900 FAX: 323-721-7888 6900 Acco St., Montebello, CA 90640 3400 Chelsea Ave, Memphis, TN 38106 In Support Of Aviation Since 1920….

www.desser.com

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 31

Vintage Mechanic

THE

BY ROBERT G. LOCK

Aircraft covering, Part 2 In part 1 of this subject we explored the beginnings of aircraft fabric covering dating back to the WW1 days. It seems like it took a world war to rapidly advance the Aeroplane and such was WW1.

Speeds and maneuverability increased dramatically and government sponsored research made advances in design, materials and processes. It was now time to apply the Aeroplane to civilian aviation.

In the early 1920s, training and combat ships were occasionally seen flying about, particularly those machines used by the barnstormers. Curtiss Jenny and Standard J-1 were the favorite ships at the time, but covering materials remained the same as in WW1. There were no regulations or requirements for civilian aviators and their ships and, as we have seen, the covering cloth

was not protected from damaging ultra violet radiation from the sun.

With government taking control of civil aviation in 1927, new regulations were written, including the covering materials for ATC’s ships.

From Aeronautics Bulletin 7-A dated July 1, 1929, comes the following information on the properties of materials. “The materials used in aircraft structures must be of the best. Since it is impossible at the present time for the department to draft a complete set of specifications or to inspect and approve all materials to be used in aircraft, it is accepting those [materials], which conform to the specifications of the United States Army or Navy, the Society of Automotive Engineers, or other recognized standard. The use of materials of inferior quality or of those which experience has

ILLUSTRATION 1 32 SEPTEMBER 2012

shown to lack uniformity of quality or strength will be regarded as sufficient cause for withholding approval of a new design or for canceling approved type certificates or licenses already granted.� Therefore the specifications for aircraft cotton cloth and dope remained the same after the end of WW1.

Aeronautics Bulletin 7-H was issued January 1, 1936 and contained data that could be applied for alterations and repairs to certificated aircraft. Illustration 1 is a direct copy from AB 7-H regarding aircraft fabric covering.

NOTE: For more detailed information relative to fabric covering and stitching, reference should be made to Army and Navy specifications on this subject.

When the Bureau of Air Commerce evolved into the CAA, Civil

Aeronautics Manuals (CAM) began to appear. Aeronautics Bulletin 7-H created in 1936 evolved into CAM-18, “Maintenance, Repair, and Alteration of Certificated Aircraft, Aircraft Engines, Propellers, and Instruments.” From a June 1, 1943, CAM 18, table 6 details standards for textile materials and supplies used in airplane covering. Airplane fabric specification is now AN-CCC-C-399-1, that specifies 80-84 threads per inch in both the warp (parallel to the selvage edge -length) and fill (90 degrees to the selvage edge) with a tensile strength of 80 pounds per inch warp and fill. This was Grade A cotton aircraft fabric. Specification for this cloth could also be found in CAM 04.415. Also detailed at this time was an intermediate airplane fabric cloth whose specification was contained in CAM 04-415-A3.

The CAM specification for Grade A cotton fabric eventually gave way to a Technical Standard Order, which is a written specification published by the FAA as a minimum performance standard for specified materials, parts and appliances used in certificated aircraft.

The TSO indicates to the purchaser or user that the material or part meets minimum quality standards.

In later revisions of CAM-18, cotton aircraft fabric became known as TSO-C14 and TSO C-15, which specified (among other things), a minimum new tensile strength of 65 pounds per inch warp and fill for intermediate TSO-C-14 cotton fabric and 80 pounds per inch warp and fill for TSO-C-15 cotton fabric.

However, the TSO also indicated the minimum tensile strength for deteriorated fabric-70% of the original new strength for each. Thus the minimum strength for C-14 fabric was 46 pounds per inch and for C-15 fabric it was 56 pounds per inch. This standard of deterioration is still valid today even with the advent of lighter and stronger synthetic Dacron material. Grade A TSO C-14 (SAE AMS 3804) intermediate cotton fabric was ap-

ILLUSTRATION 2 proved for light aircraft with wing loadings less than 9 pounds per square foot (PSF) and Vne (velocity never exceed) speeds of less than 160 mph. Its deteriorated strength was 70% of 65 pounds per inch, or 46 pounds per inch pull. Intermediate Grade A fabric was meant for the post WW2 light aircraft that were built in large numbers beginning 1946. Illustration 2 is my 1946 Aeronca 7AC in flight over the rice paddies near Merced, California in 1972.

Grade A TSO C-15 (SAE AMS 3806) cotton fabric was approved for use on all aircraft and required

on ships with a wing loading greater than 9 pounds per square foot and a velocity never exceed of 160 mph. Its deteriorated strength was 70% of 80 pounds per inch, or 56 pounds per inch pull. Grade A C-15 fabric was used on all high speed and/or high wing loading aircraft, such as this Beechcraft D-17S ship shown in illustration 3.

The Grade A cotton fabric process was used until synthetic fabric processes were introduced. But before we get into the synthetic processes, let’s step back to look at the cotton or linen process in some detail, since it is a dying art. I began

ILLUSTRATION 3 VINTAGE AIRPLANE 33

ILLUSTRATION 4 covering Stearman wings in 1956 when still in high school. All there was at that time was Grade A TSO C-15 cloth, which was manufactured by either Flightex or Reeves Brothers. Cloth came in widths of 36", 42", 60", 69" and 90" . Pinked edge surface tape (which was the same grade as the fabric) came in widths of 3/4", 1", 1-1/2", 2" , 3" , 4", 5" and 6”. Tapes could be purchased either raw or pre-doped (the pre-doped tapes were blue in color). All surface tapes had the standard 8-pinks per inch along the edge and were designed to keep the tape edges from unraveling. Tapes

34 SEPTEMBER 2012

came in 100-yard rolls, were called “pinked edge surface tape” and were to AN-C-121 specifications. Rib lacing cord was either cotton (natural color) or linen (grey color) and were classified at #6 (6-strands) or #9 (9-strands) and were coated with bees wax to prevent deterioration throughout the life of the fabric, which was 6-10 years depending on whether the ship was stored inside or outside. In some cases the fabric lasted past 10-years, particularly if the ship was painted a light color and stored inside a hangar.

Dope was still clear Nitrate (specification AN-TT-T-256) and could be

purchased in 1-gallon, 5-gallon or 54-gallon containers. Butyrate (cellulose acetate) dope (Navy specification D-23) was packaged in the same size containers and was more expensive than nitrate. Appropriate thinners were either nitrate or butyrate and were packaged in quart, gallon, and 5-gallon or 54-gallon drums.

Pigmented dope came in butyrate with many standard and a few special colors. Here we find familiar names, such as Insignia Red, White and Blue, Piper Cub Yellow, A & N Orange Yellow, Waco Gunmetal Gray, International Orange, Stinson Red, Stearman Vermilion, Travel Air Blue, Fairchild Blue, etc.

Illustration 4 is a duplication of the Berry Brothers color chip chart of the 1920s and 1930s.

Application of cotton fabric to wings was accomplished in one of two methods—blanket or envelope.

Using the 69" or 90" wide cloth it was possible to blanket cover wings with a chord of 60" or greater. For attaching the fabric cloth to the structure, a lacquer base adhesive was used. One such adhesive was called “Airlaq” which was a brown color and smelled like lacquer and acetone. With an envelope, the covering was machine sewn then slipped over the structure. It was then either hand sewn or glued at the open end. Once the adhesive had dried the covering was wet down using a sponge and a bucket of tap water. When the water tautened the fabric it was almost as tight as if several coats of dope had been applied. The surface was wrinkle free and would sound like a base drum when tapped with a finger. In some cases, dope-proof paint was applied to the structure before installation of the cloth. The paint was generally white in color and was applied to the structure by brush or spray to those portions of the structure that would come in contact with dope, thus lifting the protective coating on wood parts.

Once the fabric had dried completely from the water shrink, the first coat of dope was brushed on

to thoroughly saturate the fabric on both the outside and inside and close the pores of the cloth. Berry Brothers recommended using full wet brush coats, well saturated with dope and applied evenly. If the fabric had tautened sufficiently, reinforcing tape was glued over rib capstrips and the wings were rib laced. Straight needles from 6" to 18" in length were commonly used, as were curved needles that ranged in size from 2-1/2" to 4". Once the rib lacing was completed, surface tapes were doped in place, 2" wide tape being commonly used over wing ribs.

A total of 4-coats of clear nitrate dope was applied to early ships, 2-coats by brush and 2-coats by spray (a single coat of dope by spray consists of a cross-coat), with sanding in between coats. Illustration 5 shows an old photograph of a well-dressed craftsman spraying clear dope without the use of a respirator. Then the silver pigmented dope was applied to block the rays of the sun. Silver pigmented dope was mixed by adding 1-1/2 pounds of fine aluminum powder or a 1-pound can of silver paste to 5-gallons of clear dope (either nitrate or butyrate). Dope was thinned for spraying from 20% to 50% depending on whether it was high solids or medium solids. Proper spraying consistency came from

ILLUSTRATION 5

EAA Vintage Aircraft Association

Cub Anniversary Merchandise

These Cub anniversary items were a huge hit at AirVenture 2012. For a short time we have a limited number of 75th Anniversary caps and duffles available. This duffle won’t get lost in your airplane, it’s beautiful color stands out.

Embroidered logos on both sides of bag. Cap has three beautifully embroidered logos.

Order yours now, don’t put it off.

Call 800-564-6322 or online at

www.shopeaa.com/vintage.aspx Cap 5266 8285 00000 $15.99 Duffle 5266 8286 00000 $19.99

®

CONTACT US TODAY! TOLL FREE: 800.323.0611 TEL: 618.931.5080 FA X: 618.931.0613 SALES: sales@super flite.com WEB: w w w.super flite.com Scan this QR code with your smartphone or tablet device to view our complete line of fabrics, tapes, and finishes.

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 35

experience in mixing—if the dope was too thick, orange peel was the result.

If the dope were too thin, not enough dope would be applied to the surface. Minimum number coats of silver dope was two, however I spray a minimum of 4-cross coats to the surfaces, and 5-cross coats if the final color was silver. With nitrate or butyrate dope there was a waiting time between coats of a minimum of 45 minutes and longer if the temperature was cool. Minimum application temperature was about 70 degrees F and low humidity was most desirable. High humidity would cause the dope to blush, which caused some painful problems as the blushed dope had to be sanded off or burnt off using butyl alcohol. The remedy to blushing was to not allow it to occur! Blushing (which is the combining of wet dope with water from rapid cooling wet air) causes a clear surface to turn to a “milky” color and for silver dope to turn to a “grey” color. Blush retarder could be added to the dope to slow down the drying rate so the air just above the surface would not be cooled by rapidly evaporating thin-

ners, thus reducing the air temperature to the dew point.

Once the silver dope had dried thoroughly it was lightly wet sanded. Here a problem could occur if too much silver dope was sanded off. I always used more than the minimum number coats of silver dope recommended, either by the manufacturer of the dope or the CAA (now the FAA). The minimum number coats of dope on Grade A fabric is given in AC43.13-1A and is different than what I used as a guide.

Illustration 6 is from the 1946 Air Associates Aviation Supply Catalog No. 19 and details Berry Brothers recommendations for applying a pigmented dope finish with either nitrate or butyrate dope. The Grade A cotton and Irish Linen fabric processes are rarely used now, with most ships being covered where the owner wants complete authentic restoration or a museum quality job. In the very late 1950s were borne the synthetic fabric processes; the first being Ceconite using dope as a filler and pigmented butyrate dope as a finish. This process, while closely resembling cotton and linen, was easily adapted by those who

ILLUSTRATION 6 36 SEPTEMBER 2012

had many years of experience with the old covering methods. About 1960, Ray Stits introduced a process he called Poly Fiber. Both the Ceconite and Poly Fiber process used unshrunk woven Dacron material of various weights. Since these, and other processes, was a change to an aircraft’s Approved Type Certificate they required Supplemental Type Certificates (STC) and the first airplane of a particular type had to be FAA Field Approved because replacement of the fabric with other than original is a major alteration. Once the first airplane of a certain type was approved it was placed on the STC holders master list and all other recovering jobs could be approved on FAA Form 337 by the A&P with IA who was overseeing the work.

The synthetic covering processes (all of them) have a Procedure Manual that must be followed closely.

Only certain bits of information in the current AC43.13-1B can be used with these processes. The Procedure Manual will state which portions of the AC apply to the particular process.

Aircraft fabric covering has come a long way since the first days of linen cloth and nitrate dope with no protection from the ultraviolet sun’s rays. Now there is lifetime covering process available to the owner. The only question is —Will the structure, (particularly wood) last as long as the fabric? Ah, that is the question that many mechanics and inspectors will deal with at every Annual Inspection.

One final thought regarding synthetic covering processes—the application of UV blocking material is just as important as Grade A. We’ll have more on that next issue.

RGL, April 2009 REFERENCES: AIR ASSOCIATES SUPPLY CATALOG NO. 19, dated 1946 AERONAUTICS BULLETIN 7-H, dated January 1, 1936 CIVIL AERONAUTICS MANUAL 18, dated June 1, 1943 AC43.13-1B, Change 1, dated 9-9-98

NEWS

continued from page 3 factured blades available is an important part of keeping the world’s fleet of vintage aircraft in the air and flying safely.”

The new hubs and blades are useful on a wide variety of radial engine powered aircraft including many famous names such as Boeing, Ford, Stearman, Travel Air and WACO. The new hubs and blades carry FAA Type Certificate Number P32BO. For information contact: MT-Propeller USA, Inc. 1180 Airport Terminal Drive DeLand, FL 32724 ph. 386-736-7762 http://www.mt-propellerUSA.com e-mail: info@mt-propellerUSA.com

Grass Runway at AirVenture In a year full of new features and attractions at EAA AirVenture, thanks to the efforts of VAA and EAA staff, we were able to offer a grass landing strip during the convention, making landings safer and more efficient.

The grass landing strip is perfect for aircraft with a tailwheel or tailskid and is located southwest of the approach end of runway 36L. Because of the configuration of the airport and obstructions near the runway, only landings to the north are allowed while the airport is using a 36L-36R configuration;

no landings to the south are permitted. To gain permission to land on the strip, pilots must first obtain a copy of the special approach procedure. As next year’s convention nears, we’ll publish details on how you can use the grass strip.

Here it is in a nutshell; pilots wishing to land on the strip must communicate with the Oshkosh tower via two-way radio. On the day of arrival, a telephone call must be placed to the tower within about one hour’s flying time from Oshkosh to obtain permission to use the approach and land on the strip. To keep the possibility of the wind or traffic conditions impacting the ability of the tower to issue a clearance, we’d suggest an early morning arrival (per the NOTAM, the airport opens to arrivals at 0700). Pilots must also be familiar with the EAA AirVenture NOTAM, in case the landing clearance must be canceled and a landing on the paved runways is required. The approval by the FAA and airport management came very late in the planning for the 2012 event, so it was difficult to get the word out so that more pilots could use the strip, but we look forward to working with the Agency and airport authorities to work out an acceptable operational plan for the 2012 fly-in.

Cubs 2 Oshkosh What a great week! Thank you to the Piper Cub owners who flew to AirVenture Oshkosh 2012. The flightline was just what we hoped for--a “field of yellow” as aviators celebrated the iconic aircraft’s 75th anniversary at Wittman Regional Airport. Our thanks to all of you who helped make this a wonderful week by flying your Cubs to Hartford, Wisconsin and Oshkosh.

We also want to thank our sponsors, Piper Aircraft and Univair for

their invaluable support, which made it pos s ible f or th e co m memorative hats and barrel bags presented to the pilots, as well as support for our annual picnic and dinner, plus signage and the presentation of the historical artifacts displayed by the Piper Historical Museum and Harry Mutter.

We want to recognize the city of Hartford for their incredible “welcome!” as well as Steve Krog, Dana Osmanski and the 85 hardworking volunteers who worked all weekend in Hartford to make the gathering so special. Rick Rademacher got the ball rolling early and then kept it going using the Chapter website page EAA created for Cubs 2 Oshkosh, and here in Oshkosh VAA director Dan Knutson, his wife Mary, along with Jess Krall and Leroy Brandt stepped up to help organize and welcome the pilots as they arrived in Oshkosh. Ron Alexander put together a ter rific evening program at Theater in the Wood featuring two of Cub world’s brightest starts, Piper historian Roger Pepperell and Cub restoration expert, the “Cub Doctor”, Clyde Smith Jr. (Who also is this year’s VAA Hall of Fame inductee).

We’ll have more on the Cubs 2 Oshkosh celebration in an upcoming issue, so until then, please accept our simple “Thanks!”

VAA Election Results During the general membership meeting held the morning of July 31, 2012, the following were elected by the EAA Vintage Aircraft Association members: President, Geoff Robison; Secretary, Steve Nesse; Directors, Ron Alexander, Steve Bender, Dave Clark, Steven L. Krog, Jeannie Lehman Hill, Robert D. “Bob” Lumley, Joe Norris, Tim Popp.

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 37

by H.G. FRAUTSCHY

MYSTERY PLANE This month’s Mystery Plane comes to us from the EAA archives; it’s part of our Cedric Galloway collection.

Send your answer to EAA, Vintage Airplane, P.O. Box 3086, Oshkosh, WI 54903-3086. Your answer needs to be in no later than October 10 for inclusion in the December 2012 issue of Vintage Airplane.

You can also send your response via e-mail. Send your answer to mysteryplane@eaa.org. Be sure to include your name plus your city and state in the body of your note and put “(Month) Mystery Plane” in the subject line.

JUNE’S MYSTERY ANSWER Our June Mystery Plane came to us from the Cedric Galloway collection of the EAA archive.

The first answer comes from Lyn Towns, of Holt, Michigan.

The June Mystery Plane is a model CC-14 Cain Sport that was built in 1931 by the Cain Aircraft Corporation at 10527 Gratiot Avenue in Detroit, Michigan. Harry Cain was the president, and Kenneth Ronan was the engineer.

Kenneth Ronan was also chief engineer for Stinson Aircraft Corporation, and he later designed and

38 SEPTEMBER 2012

built the Abrams P-1 Explorer aerial photography and survey aircraft.

The CC-14 was a two-place sideby-side parasol plane powered by a 95-hp Cirrus Hi-Drive engine, licensebuilt by the U.S. American Cirrus Engine (ACE) Corporation. It had a wingspan of 34 feet 0 inches, overall length of 23 feet 8 inches, a maximum speed of 110 mph, a cruising speed of 93 mph, a stall speed of 35 mph, and a range of 550 miles.

NC11191, the first example that Cain Aircraft built, was exhibited at the 1931 Detroit National Aircraft Show between April 11, 1931, and April 19, 1931, where it was advertised at the price of $2,475. The airplane had not flown yet, but it was later test flown at Detroit City Airport. This plane was destroyed in a spin accident in June of 1931, killing the test pilot.

NC11342 was built by Cain Aircraft under Group 2 Approval #2-383 issued on 9-11-31. This airplane was badly damaged in an accident in Minnesota in 1938.

No other examples were ever built.

In his answer, Thomas Lymburn of Princeton, Minnesota, adds this about the Cain: Only two appear to have been built by the Cain Aircraft Corporation of Detroit; NC11191 (serial number 1) and NC11342 (serial number 2). Cain had been founded on 1 January, 1931.

Costing $2,475, the CC-14 was powered by an American Cirrus Engine (ACE) Corporation Cirrus Hi-Drive of 95 hp. Herschel Smith (A History of Aircraft Piston Engines, Sunflower University Press, 1991) notes that the Cirrus engine was license-built by ACE of Marysville, Michigan, from 1928 to 1935. When ACE gave up business, its assets were taken over by Menasco.

The Hi-Drive appeared in both upright and inverted models and was used in the Great Lakes and Fairchild 22.

Other correct answers were received from Wes Smith, Springfield, Illinois, and Wayne Muxlow, Minneapolis, Minnesota. In addition, after the August issue had gone to press, we received a nice note from George Waller correctly answering the May Mystery Plane.

VINTAGE TRADER S o m e t h i n g t o b u y, s e l l , o r t r a d e ?

Classified Word Ads: $5.50 per 10 words, 180 words maximum, with boldface lead-in on first line.

Classified Display Ads: One column wide (2.167 inches) by 1, 2, or 3 inches high at $20 per inch. Black and white only, and no frequency discounts.

Advertising Closing Dates: 10th of second month prior to desired issue date (i.e., January 10 is the closing date for the March issue). VAA reserves the right to reject any advertising in conflict with its policies. Rates cover one insertion per issue. Classified ads are not accepted via phone. Payment must accompany order. Word ads may be sent via fax (920-426-4828) or e-mail (classads@eaa.org) using credit card payment (all cards accepted). Include name on card, complete address, type of card, card number, and expiration date. Make checks payable to EAA. Address advertising correspondence to EAA Publications Classified Ad Manager, P.O. Box 3086, Oshkosh, WI 54903-3086.

M ISC ELLA N EO U S

SERVIC ES

w w w. a e r o l i s t . o r g , A v i a t i o n s ’ L e a d i n g Marketplace.

W ood and F abr ic A & P Technician— Looking for a specialist with experience in historic Wood and Fabric airplanes for restoration and maintenance of existing airplanes at major museum (www.MilitaryAviationMuseum.org) in the resort city of Virginia Beach. Must have experience in building replica airworthy World War One aircraft. For information call (757) 490-3157 or email to EPY1@aol.com

A lw ay s F ly ing A ir cr aft R es to r atio n, LLC : Annual Inspections, Airframe recovering, fabric repairs and complete restorations.

W ay ne A . F or s hey A &P & I.A . 7 4 0 -4 7 2 -14 81 Ohio and bordering states.

®

PMS 661

PMS 124

VINTAGE AIRPLANE 39

All the Difference in the World Sharing a common perspective

article and photos by

O

shkosh 2006—my first trip there, and it happened to be the hottest week of the year. I flew there in a twin Cessna with some friends. The plane was full with seven of us. We parked at Basler Fight Service, did the rental car thing, and checked in at the deluxe, air-conditioned suites at the University of Wisconsin.

Well, okay. It was a place to sleep.

The rooms weren’t suites. They were not air-conditioned, and deluxe is definitely an overstatement.

The rest is true.

I’d traveled with these folks before, so I knew what I was in for.

Good folks; good pilots whose reason to fly was getting from point A to point B quickly. With a cabinclass airplane their focus was primarily on things related to business flying like GPS, weather equipment, and electronic goodies.

While I was out watching the air show they were walking through the vendor hangars. While I was getting photographs of warbirds in

40 SEPTEMBER 2012

S. Michelle Souder

flight they were checking out the latest technology relevant to them.

When we met back together my stories of what I had seen didn’t begin to resemble theirs.

Same place, same event, same people—totally different perspectives. The majority of the trip I enjoyed solo. For me, even though I had a good time, it felt a little empty.

Fast-forward to Oshkosh 2010.

The noble steed was a Honda Civic instead of a Cessna. Yes, that’s right.

I drove. (Not the ideal way, but the event was nicknamed “Sloshkosh.”

Besides, it took the place of a rental car to get dinner.)

I arrived on Saturday night at a dear friend’s house a few miles from OSH—my home for three days with wonderful hospitality and a beautiful view. It was not the hottest week of the year, though wettest might be close.

Two of my flying buddies arrived via airplane Sunday morning. Together we saw lots of vintage aircraft, ultralights, the DC-3s, and

“normal” airplanes—and talked about them. We enjoyed Sunday afternoon at the museum and that evening walked through uncrowded aircraft exhibits in the pleasant evening sun. Things the “traveling” aviators would have missed were now conversation pieces.

Monday we met friends from the Midwest who also are at home with old airplanes. We sat and talked amid aircraft from early aviation years to present, enjoying the radial’s deep noises and embellishing a few stories besides. We may not have traveled there with the latest glass panels, but we certainly had a grand time to remember.

Two trips, same location, but oh, so completely different. How much more fulfilling it was to share the experience with close friends who have common interests. How good to take those memories home and share them over again as each of us saw something different as we looked at the same things. It makes all the difference in the world.

VINTAGE AIRCRAFT ASSOCIATION OFFICERS

President Geoff Robison 1521 E. MacGregor Dr. New Haven, IN 46774 260-493-4724 chief7025@aol.com

Ron Alexander 118 Huff Daland Circle Griffin, GA 30223-6827 ronalexander@mindspring.com Steve Bender 85 Brush Hill Road Sherborn, MA 01770 508-653-7557 aaflagship@gmail.com David Bennett 375 Killdeer Ct Lincoln, CA 95648 916-952-9449 antiquer@inreach.com Jerry Brown 4605 Hickory Wood Row Greenwood, IN 46143 317-422-9366 lbrown4906@aol.com

Enjoy the many benefits of the EAA Vintage Aircraft Association

Secretary Steve Nesse 2009 Highland Ave. Albert Lea, MN 56007 507-373-1674 Treasurer Dan Knutson 106 Tena Marie Circle Lodi, WI 53555 608-592-7224 lodicub@charter.net

Vice-President George Daubner N57W34837 Pondview Ln Oconomowoc, WI 53066 262-560-1949 gdaubner@eaa.org

DIRECTORS

Dave Clark 635 Vestal Lane Plainfield, IN 46168 317-839-4500 davecpd@att.net

Steve Krog 1002 Heather Ln. Hartford, WI 53027 262-966-7627 sskrog@gmail.com

Phil Coulson 28415 Springbrook Dr. Lawton, MI 49065 269-624-6490 rcoulson516@cs.com

Robert D. “Bob” Lumley 1265 South 124th St. Brookfield, WI 53005 262-782-2633 rlumley1@wi.rr.com

Dale A. Gustafson 7724 Shady Hills Dr. Indianapolis, IN 46278 317-293-4430 dalefaye@msn.com

Joe Norris tailwheelpilot@hughes.net 920-688-2977

Jeannie Hill P.O. Box 328 Harvard, IL 60033-0328 920-426-6110

Gene Chase 8555 S. Lewis Ave., #32 Tulsa, OK 74137 918-298-3692

DIRECTORS EMERITUS

S.H. “Wes” Schmid 2359 Lefeber Avenue Wauwatosa, WI 53213 414-771-1545 shschmid@gmail.com

Fax (920) 426-4873

Web Site: www.vintageaircraft.org E-Mail: vintageaircraft@eaa.org VINTAGE AIRCRAFT ASSOCIATION

Current EAA members may join the Vintage Aircraft Association and receive VINTAGE AIRPLANE magazine for an additional $42 per year.

EAA Membership, VINTAGE AIRPLANE magazine and one year membership in the EAA Vintage Aircraft Association is available for $52 per year (SPORT AVIATION magazine not included).

(Add $7 for International Postage.)

Membership in the Experimental Aircraft Association, Inc. is $40 for one year, including 12 issues of SPORT AVIATION. Family membership is an additional $10 annually. All major credit cards accepted for membership. (Add $16 for International Postage.)

FOREIGN MEMBERSHIPS

Please submit your remittance with a check or draft drawn on a United States bank payable in United States dollars. Add required Foreign Postage amount for each membership.

Membership Services

Monday–Friday, 8:00 AM—6:00 PM CST

Join/Renew800-564-6322 membership@eaa.org

EAA AirVenture Oshkosh 888-322-4636 www.airventure.org airventure@eaa.org

Sport Pilot/Light-Sport Aircraft Hotline 877-359-1232 www.sportpilot.org sportpilot@eaa.org Auto Fuel STCs

920-426-4843

EAA Air Academy www.airacademy.org

920-426-6880/4815 airacademy@eaa.org

stc@eaa.org

EAA Scholarships

920-426-6823

scholarships@eaa.org

Library Services/Research

920-426-4848

slurvey@eaa.org

EAA VISA Card

800-853-5576 ext. 8884

EAA Hertz Rent-A-Car Program 800-654-2200 www.eaa.org/hertz membership@eaa.org VAA Editor/Executive Director 920-426-4825 www.vintageaircraft.org vintage@eaa.org VAA Office

920-426-6110

tbooks@eaa.org

Copyright ©2012 by the EAA Vintage Aircraft Association, All rights reserved.

Ronald C. Fritz 15401 Sparta Ave. Kent City, MI 49330 616-678-5012 rFritz@pathwaynet.com

E.E. “Buck” Hilbert 8102 Leech Rd. Union, IL 60180 815-923-4591 buck7ac@gmail.com

Charles W. Harris PO Box 470350 Tulsa, OK 74147 918-622-8400 cwh@hvsu.com

Gene Morris 5936 Steve Court Roanoke, TX 76262 817-491-9110 genemorris@charter.net

John Turgyan PO Box 219 New Egypt, NJ 08533 609-752-1944 jrturgyan4@aol.com

PO Box 3086, Oshkosh WI 54903-3086 Phone (920) 426-4800

EAA

Tim Popp 60568 Springhaven Ct. Lawton, MI 49065 269-624-5036 tlpopp@frontier.com

Robert C. Brauer 9345 S. Hoyne Chicago, IL 60643 773-779-2105 photopilot@aol.com

Membership Services Directory

VINTAGE AIRPLANE (USPS 062-750; ISSN 0091-6943) is published and owned exclusively by the EAA Vintage Aircraft Association of the Experimental Aircraft Association and is published monthly at EAA Aviation Center, 3000 Poberezny Rd., PO Box 3086, Oshkosh, Wisconsin 549023-3086, e-mail: vintageaircraft@eaa.org. Membership to Vintage Aircraft Association, which includes 12 issues of Vintage Airplane magazine, is $42 per year for EAA members and $52 for non-EAA members. Periodicals Postage paid at Oshkosh, Wisconsin 54902 and at additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Vintage Airplane, PO Box 3086, Oshkosh, WI 54903-3086. CPC #40612608. FOREIGN AND APO ADDRESSES— Please allow at least two months for delivery of VINTAGE AIRPLANE to foreign and APO addresses via surface mail. ADVERTISING — Vintage Aircraft Association does not guarantee or endorse any product offered through the advertising. We invite constructive criticism and welcome any report of inferior merchandise obtained through our advertising so that corrective measures can be taken.

EDITORIAL POLICY: Members are encouraged to submit stories and photographs. Policy opinions expressed in articles are solely those of the authors. Responsibility for accuracy in reporting rests entirely with the contributor. No remuneration is made. Material should be sent to: Editor, VINTAGE AIRPLANE, PO Box 3086, Oshkosh, WI 54903-3086. Phone 920-426-4800.

EAA® and EAA SPORT AVIATION®, the EAA Logo® and Aeronautica™ are registered trademarks, trademarks, and service marks of the Experimental Aircraft Association, Inc. The use of these trademarks and service marks without the permission of the Experimental Aircraft Association, Inc. is strictly prohibited.