58Skylane wrote:

8GCBC wrote:I try to get an MSD to find out what something is made of, not a bunch of smoke and mirrors.

Did you mean MSDS? If so, that acronym is in the process of being changed to SDS (Safety Data Sheets) and many companies may already switched to SDS. Just an FYI.

Yes!!! I stand corrected. Thank you!!

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_safety_data_sheet

MSDS & SDS are great place to start when dealing with new products. My feeling is with no disrespect is that aircrafts are really just commercially available products that are typically renamed or altered to get a job done. Understanding the compounds that are being used is where I like to start.

I apologize for using a "canned" statement "smoke and mirrors". Pretty low and may of been disrespectful.

MSD = marine sanitation device

8GCBC wrote:

58Skylane wrote:

8GCBC wrote:I try to get an MSD to find out what something is made of, not a bunch of smoke and mirrors.

Did you mean MSDS? If so, that acronym is in the process of being changed to SDS (Safety Data Sheets) and many companies may already switched to SDS. Just an FYI.

Yes!!! I stand corrected. Thank you!!

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_safety_data_sheet

MSDS & SDS are great place to start when dealing with new products. My feeling is with no disrespect is that aircrafts are really just commercially available products that are typically renamed or altered to get a job done. Understanding the compounds that are being used is where I like to start.

I apologize for using a "canned" statement "smoke and mirrors". Pretty low and may of been disrespectful.

MSD = marine sanitation device

No hard feelings on my part. Just passing along new info.

I don't like the see through of the oratex fabric. I have heard rumors that when you keep the coats down you can get within a few lbs of oratex. Cubcrafters uses poly fiber and after the polybush they go right to silver polytone. I feel like if you have to paint the oratex you are not gaining anything over polyfiber.

This is going to be FUN.... Subscribed...I'll be watching and I'm sure drooling on this build
Mike

Tom wrote:I don't like the see through of the oratex fabric. I have heard rumors that when you keep the coats down you can get within a few lbs of oratex. Cubcrafters uses poly fiber and after the polybush they go right to silver polytone. I feel like if you have to paint the oratex you are not gaining anything over polyfiber.

I thought it was colored and didn't require paint? If no paint is required then it is considerably cheaper then other fabrics. Paint is not cheap...

You don't have to paint it and some of the colors are slightly translucent. It can be painted.

No, paint is not cheap. I have $3K in Superflite System 3 urethane primer and topcoats in the S7S. If RS wasn't so hard headed, the S20 would be wearing Oratex. We could care less about the dull color or translucent-ness. I understand the real world savings on weight with a cub style aircraft is around #20. The time saved in paint prep, and the money saved in supply seems like a no-brainer.

Tom wrote:I don't like the see through of the oratex fabric. I have heard rumors that when you keep the coats down you can get within a few lbs of oratex. Cubcrafters uses poly fiber and after the polybush they go right to silver polytone. I feel like if you have to paint the oratex you are not gaining anything over polyfiber.

I'm certainly not going to tell Cubcrafters how to cover airplanes, but my understanding is silver Poly-Tone is not sufficient as a UV blocker, not nearly so as Poly-spray. The aluminum pigments are a different shape and size, and they "lay down" different. I doubt many factory purchased CC owners end up tying their 1/4 million dollar fabric aircraft outside....maybe they figure the weight savings is worth the lesser UV protection? Or maybe they know something Ray Stits didn't.

As others have said, no need to paint Oratex, and the slight see through effect is of no moment if you are serious about weight loss, I for one think it looks kind of cool.

Left unsaid, is the fact that not having to deal with multiple coats of whatever base coats and on up to a finish paint, would be a huge labor savings. Those of us who have covered and finished airplanes will know what I mean, you need to devise a way to hold the rudder, flap or whatever, while working on it while still leaving it in the clear while spraying. I've covered 5 (and a half) airplanes, all with the Stits/PolyFiber system, and thinking back......it would save a LOT of time not dealing with all those coatings. Every coat means re-cleaning the paint booth, and all the rigmarole that goes with it, having the paint booth at the proper temperature, cleaning the spray gun, etc. I've always said "if you like taping and finishing drywall, you'll love aircraft fabric work"! It's a PITA no matter what, eliminating the coatings and paint would make the cost of Oratex a no brainer for me. The weight savings would be a bonus. Around 20 lbs saving? Hell yes, sign me up! If it cost 4K more, that works out to $200.00 a pound savings, and that is a bargain in the weight loss airplane building world.

Some years ago Budd Davisson recovered his Pitts that he uses for training in the Phoenix area. Instead of using the standard heavy duty fabric he used two layers of glide cloth. He said the weight saving was huge and the fine weave absorber way less paint.. It would be best to contact him directly for the details if you are interested at all. Budd Davisson <[email protected]
KenW Bearhawk builder with the Landrover motor

Oratex is for certain the way to go I'm thinking. Mackey is building 2 of his own planes now with the stuff, all of those current SQ owners, I have spoken to most, have said they too would go with Oratex if they were doing it again. Your build experience CG says slot as well. I'm in! The weight savings alone sells it for me. Spoke with Frank Knapp and he swears by it. July 10th cannot come soon enough.

AKT

AKT,

Just curious, how much reduction in weight do you think you will get by going with Oratex? The 20 or so pounds stated in this thread or a different number?

Kurt

G44 wrote:AKT,

Just curious, how much reduction in weight do you think you will get by going with Oratex? The 20 or so pounds stated in this thread or a different number?

Kurt

With only knowledge from research it appears to be around 20-30lbs. Again only going off what most have said. I know my 180 put on about 25lbs in paint alone. It's amazing how much paint weighs. I start thinking about all the labor that goes into this and the chemicals your subjected to not to mention time, the extra cost and ease of application is a seller for me..bonus is the weight savings...call it 5lbs or 25lbs pounds it all adds up to a win win I'm thinking.

Akt

One thing I have learned with trying to cut down weight, the "published numbers" are much higher than what you actually save. Maybe the scale I have is just way off. Everyone claims to save ten pounds by using this. Or that. And it's really only 3 or 4. What I said about painting is that my understanding of the breedens new cub is its covered with oratex and then painted. I would guess that with the paint you are right back up to the weight you would be at and twice the money.
Personally, I do not like the see through look, and I wouldn't be happy with it. How long is that going to last? Just like the carbon Cubs, no one knows. So you are taking a gamble on both.

I have spent some good time talking with Breeden and Knapp. Yes the Glacier Cub got one coat of paint adding 1.5lbs of paint over the Olive Oratex. Knapp did not paint his. Both feel like they saved 20 plus pounds.

Tom wrote: So you are taking a gamble on both.

Aviation has always been a bit of a gamble on many different levels. I like what I have read on the Oratex but I agree it will take time to see how it holds up to the elements. The category of pilots with eligible airplanes that are attracted to the Ortax, I think will be a little more tolerant of any short comings just because they are more into modifying, experimenting and operating in harsher environments than the average rag winger.

I tried to talk to the guys at the Oratex booth at the trade show in Anchorage but they were pretty busy with others however I was able to spend some time learning more about the Stewart's System and will probably go that route with my C-120 wings just because the Oratex is not available for certified aircraft yet.

aktahoe1 wrote:I have spent some good time talking with Breeden and Knapp. Yes the Glacier Cub got one coat of paint adding 1.5lbs of paint over the Olive Oratex. Knapp did not paint his. Both feel like they saved 20 plus pounds.

This cub (Franks) has spent a couple off seasons parked in the Yuma AZ outdoors (*think somewhere like hell...) right next to my Stewarts covered cub, which used to be an Airtech covered cub, and before that a Randolph covered cub. Yes, I covered all of it with the last two, and most of it with the Randolph... So far it seems to hold up as good or better, and looks as good or better. Mine took way, way longer to cover than Franks (my time), took more equipment, was far more complicated to set up for (try setting up a spray booth at home vs. just covering)... and made for far more chemical mess...

It will be what I use on my next cub

Take care, Rob

Have been waiting for you to respond here Rob!

I actually have a bunch of questions for you. PM me your number again. I cant find it.

Oratex its for certain.

Personal note to self: Also see engine thread:
https://www.backcountrypilot.org/community/forum/latest/titan-ace-performance-engines-17304

AKT

Hi Kevin,

You're in for a ball!!! Unfortunately, converting my dirt strip to grass, and covering the hay barn up to double as an equipment / airplane storage in a pinch has put my EX plans on hold for a bit. Trying to get all caught up before we head north for our summer break.

And speak of the.... I ran into town Saturday and oddly enough I get a picture text from my strip... It was Frank claiming to be looking for my strip on google earth... Really had me going for a while Didi I mention I can be a bonehead sometimes?

PM headed your way, I am pretty slow right now so most any time of the day is cool

Take care, Rob

A few thoughts on Oratex. I have a roll of the 6000 in Cub Yellow, which I am just starting to apply to my build. I have heard the comments about translucence in several forums. Best I can tell it applies to the 3000 grade, which is not used much outside of ultralights or other special projects. I don't detect much translucence with my fabric.

Before purchasing a big roll I made up a few wooden frames and applied the 6000 to them following the directions carefully. Took about 15 minutes per frame. As advised by Lars at Better Aircraft, the key is temperature control. I bought the recommended temp controlled iron, and calibrated heat gun. Yep, I said heat gun! The bane of traditional fabric process. Works great with Oratex. Lars sends a doc with the temperature recipe which I printed and tacked on the shop wall. Essentially just apply glue, wait 24 hours, iron it down and go fly!

The fabric can be repeatedly heated to tighten it up. For a bush plane this seems valuable. In my testing I gave the frames to the teenagers in my life and asked them to destroy them. I asked them to use fists, knees, rocks boots, and finally hammers. The fabric is amazing in its ability to bounce back after an injury. Hits that would *at least* crack/damage Stits coatings, made a small stretched injury, that slowly shrank back to tight in a minute or two. With much pounding and kicking they were finally able to put a dent in the fabric that didn't self heal. This is where the Oratex shines: I just hit it with the heat gun and it shrank up perfectly with no injury visible. I repeated this test 3 or 4 times to the same frame and each time the same bit of fabric shrank tight over and over. Using the sharp corner of a woodstove they were able to tear the fabric in the frames which provided me a test of the patching process. Just as documented, super easy to fix, looks great once fixed. Interestingly the fabric sticks well to duct tape, so a roll will work for an uncertified field repair. Watch the you tube videos of all the torture they put the fabric through for more details.

As for weight, on my Kolb Mark 3 Xtra, the square footage works out to closer to 30 pounds savings. I don't have the square feet right at hand, but I am sure about the savings. I suspect a Cub would use more fabric, and therefore save more weight.

I find the finish on the fabric perfect for my bush flying needs. I have heard stories of painting Oratex, but that is not for me. Lars and his salesmen did a You Tube video recently documenting the weight differences between the competitors and the results square exactly from my extensive research last year when I made the choice to go with Oratex.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tjzn0UA2VeE

Finally a word on customer service. I bought the fabric last summer and hadn't called Lars with any questions since then because I am behind and hadn't started applying it yet. A month or two ago Lars calls me out of the blue asking for a report and offering any help I might need. That means a lot to me.

Hope this helps those on the fence with Oratex.

I have done an incredible amount of research and almost purchased the one just listed on the Supercub forum from my buddy Dave Kirsten. He has a very nice 1 off, Mackey built SQ. But again, its not to my specific specs and just passed on

I am leaning hard on several of those who have already built one and Randy Goza (basically one of the creators of the aircraft since inception along with Wayne Mackey). Goza has been nothing short of helpful with all of my questions and I am really following his lead on much of this.

As of now I am leaning toward the Titan 409 angle valve, fuel injected, dual P mags, earth X battery. I have thought long and hard on the Oratex and really I keep coming back to the Super flight 7. Thats what the builder prefers as well.
I still have so many questions and wonders as to the Constant Speed of Fixed, obviously both completely different in weight and with different performance values. So the jury is still out on that.

Weight savings is my biggest goal. After seeing several of these I am not interested in all of the fancy avionics,, heavy leather seats, belly pods, etc. Most that I have seen are around that 1300lb mark and heavier. Mackey and Goza have built several around 1150. Thats the goal at least.

Aerotronics makes some good stuff as does Dynon. Will see where we end up. So much to think about. in each catogory its really fun to create. Will see what the bank budget allows....(the wife) As of now she swears I am going to sell the 180... Will see.

Anyhow, thats the update

AKT

Very cool sounding plane to look forward to! Exciting stuff.

Awesome that you've found someone who can build it for you. I think your plan to keep it light is a good one, weight really makes all the difference. Things like autopilot and traditional steam gauges are tempting, but the performance that comes from weight savings is such an adrenaline rush. It's hard to beat!

aktahoe1 wrote:I still have so many questions and wonders as to the Constant Speed of Fixed, obviously both completely different in weight and with different performance values. So the jury is still out on that.

Do you think the SQ2 cruises fast enough to warrant a CS prop?
There's also ground adjustable?
I really like the look of Whirlwind CS 210 props with composite blades, and will be changing to their blades once we wear our first set out (their 210 blades were just too untested back when I bought our prop).