I don't have access to a hangar up here, so, any airplane that I buy, will end up being tied up to a lake-shore wearing floats during the summer,
and tied down on a ramp wearing wheels/skis during the winter (about 6 months of each) with engine, wing & tail covers installed between flights.

If an airplane has been professionally recovered with new fabric & repainted with good paint, just prior to purchase:
How many years could I expect that fabric & paint to last, given the prevailing weather conditions around Anchorage, AK?

Thanx, Dave.

P.S. - Or, should I only buy an aluminum airplane?

Dave you'll get many opinions depending on how the airframe was prepared prior to cover and what cover process was used. My experience has been that if the airframe is sound and protected inside and out it should last 15-20 yrs before needing inspection. Being on floats or in a wet environment like Anchorage vs a drier climate like Fairbanks will vary that need. You can tell when any wood parts get weathered or metal begins to corrode mainly low in the rear of the plane.

As far as fabric and dope I'd not buy a plane kept outdoors that wasn't covered in a polyurethane or equivalent cover over sound fabric. Common "dope" like Stits or Randolph offer can start to crack and weather within two years. Eventually by five years it'll be noticeable and by 10 surface repairs are often in order. Flying in real cold will hasten the weathering and cracking. Covering the topcoat with covers will slow the process. This is based upon owning nine fabric planes over 45 years in Alaska that lived outside, and observing many that were treated the same from a new start to finish.

Kept indoors and they last far longer. If you're not one to watch rust grow and fabric oxidize get a metal plane.

Gary

Gary nailed it on the head. A good covering job with a modern system will last quite a long time. Lots of guys would say it's not a stretch to say it can outlast the tubing beneath it. Those same guys say you pull the fabric off in 20 years just to properly inspect the tube structure. In certain conditions that would be wise, but in a drier climate I don't think its necessary. 15-20 years should be no problem for a fresh cover job.

Here's another thing to consider Dave. If you plan on having to repair the airplane periodically due to bangs and bumps...then a cheap fabric job may be just ok. You'll hear how that's often the case for work aircraft, and how a nice durable surface coat (like Stits Aerothane or similar) that needs periodic repairs is no better in the long term than one that's soft and quick to fix. Repairs are simpler on dope but can be done and work well with a tougher finish.

I've seen many a fabric covered aircraft that had a soft weathered dope job that were later in life painted over with automotive or aircraft catalyzed urethane topcoats. The fact that they then outlasted the undercoat's normal life is a statement to that product's durability.

Metal bends and corrodes so isn't perfect either. I've flown for work metal planes that were durable and repairable, but sometimes what you want to own doesn't come in that material.

The important consideration for fabric aircraft is the quality of the job done on prepping the metal frame prior to covering as I mentioned above.

Gary

I agree with the above. But understand that how long a fabric job will “last” and what it looks like towards the end of that period are different questions.

But a good fabric job will last a long time. Well cared for it may not look too bad over time.

MTV

Food for thought if you're still hungry for a fabric plane: At lunch recently I asked a local experienced restorer of aircraft what the market price was for a cover job on a PA-12 sized plane - no major repairs or surprises - $30K+ depending on colors and finish. Then there was the usual fix-its due to age and weather - Another $5K plus or minus might cover that at $115/hr, a typical Alaskan rate. Any mods and special likes? Bring money but the overall package is usually negotiable. It can take a year or two start to finish depending on project size. I've been through the process and yes that's what's involved.

So then we ask ourselves....where in this train will we and our aircraft be in years to come when ready to sell, upgrade, or move on to other pursuits? Which plane - fabric or metal - will tax us more financially during the run and at the finish? Hangars are cheap insurance along the way unless we put aside the equivalent funds for the next restoration.

Gary

Good points Gary. I've had 3 calls lately asking about the cost of fabric jobs. When I tell them 30k ish the answer is oh... people dont realize how time consuming it is and how much work it is to do nice work. I get a kick out of people on Facebook saying to just buy the fabric and do it yourself, a fast way to learn a hard lesson IMO. Not that it can't be done, but it's not easy and not fast.

There are skill levels to master in recovering and/or maintaining a fabric plane in Alaska. The process demands prior knowledge and dealing with the hazardous chemicals associated with some STC's. That includes prepping and covering. Then the owner wants this and that done "well as long as we have that exposed, let's do these...". Or homebuilders that enjoy the process as much as end the product get involved. Either way there are fewer skilled restorers or builders getting into the business would be my guess.

I've owned planes because I wanted to experience them and really never looked out at the eventual end game. I suppose there's a break-even age and condition beyond which the airframe or engine will need work. Those repairs can very likely put the value of the plane well underwater like the current mortgage market for some. There is only so much value is something that buyers eventually determine.

I hope this discussion has meaning. If the owner is a business entity and can use the aircraft to secure or absorb profits, then that's a different scenario driving the choices - fabric or metal per Dave's question - than a private owner eating all the costs and maintenance to retain future value of an aircraft they truly enjoy despite the downsides.

Gary

Thanx Guys, that was very helpful. I'm shopping for a plane to use around south-central AK for 5-7 years.
At the end of that time-line, with an empty nest, we'll probably change where & how we live, work & recreate.
When that time comes, I don't want to spend a large amount of money, fixing fabric & paint, to make it marketable.
Same goes for the motor; after flying it for my purposes, I don't want an overhaul looming over the re-sale.

A1,
Since you have experience building 8GCBC type aircraft; do new wooden spars under new paint & fabric have similar longevity?

Thanx again, Dave.

Dave,

I’d shy away from wood spars. Frankly, they are great, except for the reputation amongst uninformed. Also they are hard to properly inspect....some tiny crack.....is it surface or deeper? Cautious IA will want to look deeper or?

So, you a dolphin wearer?

MTV

Maybe a little off topic but I will also mention that nasty thing called inflation. I realize you just want to buy it, fly it, then flip it. If the plane is going to be close to its end of life, fabric wise, the new buyer will also have to take into account a recover. That recover that costs $30K today may cost considerably more when that time comes. Inflation is a bugger sometimes!

Case in point. I checked on getting a Super Cub I was looking at, recovored about 10 years ago. I knew the plane and had gotten my first ride in it 50 years ago. The plane was on its second owner and was in dire need of recover. Sure I wanted the plane for sentimental reasons, but it was aso the type I was looking for. It had a newly overhauled engine, price was fair, but as guys have mentioned, I knew I would have wanted mods installed on the recover and in the end, it wasn't cost effective. By the way the recover quoted to me was nearly half of what guys are quoting on here, but this was a decade ago.

mtv wrote:Dave,

I’d shy away from wood spars. Frankly, they are great, except for the reputation amongst uninformed. Also they are hard to properly inspect....some tiny crack.....is it surface or deeper? Cautious IA will want to look deeper or?

So, you a dolphin wearer?

MTV

I'd disagree. They really aren't that hard to inspect if the plane is covered with enough inspection panels and you know what you are doing. A new set of Rainbow spars in a Scout really takes care of the problem (if there ever was one). I do agree that the uninformed dont like them though. But metal wings add about 30k to the price...
Dave, new spars under a new cover job should last. Again it comes down to the rebuild job. If the installer put any scratches on the spar when sliding the ribs on did they revarnish those areas? If not it give moisture a point of entry. If they did revarnish then there is no reason they wont last as long as or very possibly outlast the fabric. There is a lot of wood spars flying around that were installed in the late 60s and early 70s that still look great.

David

Oh, as I said wood spars are great, IF you know what you’re looking at.

And the NEW spars are better.

That said, you don’t get to choose the guy who does the pre buy for the buyer when you decide to sell.

Finally, I know of one plane that had what looked like scratches on one spar. IA saw it, signed it off. Next guy said look closer.....spar was cracked, not scratched. Both these guys are competent and familiar with the type.

It ain’t rocket science, but.

I’ve flown a number of wood spar planes, and I’d do so again. But buy one with the intent of flipping it in five years? No way.

MTV

There's an interesting Aeronca Sedan for sale on Anchorage Craigslist. https://anchorage.craigslist.org/search/avo

Fabric and metal.

Gary

PA1195 wrote:
So then we ask ourselves....where in this train will we and our aircraft be in years to come when ready to sell, upgrade, or move on to other pursuits? Which plane - fabric or metal - will tax us more financially during the run and at the finish? Hangars are cheap insurance along the way unless we put aside the equivalent funds for the next restoration.

Gary

Some great points brought up in this thread. One thing I would add, and this comes as a former paint manufacturer and a tech rep for a fabric system.... Wax is your friend. One of the cheapest and best things you can do for your topcoat is a good agressive wash followed by a good coat of Carnuba wax at least once a year, whether you're hangared or not, whether it's fabric or metal, and yes, even if it's finished in polyurethane. The more elements that you can keep out of contact with your topcoat, the longer it will last, and the longer that topcoat is in good shape, the longer the whole aircraft will last!
As far as the cost of cover, it can be brought down considerably if you're willing to work along side your IA. There are lots of things, labor wise that you can do with even a smidgen of mechanical skill, that will save you a heap of money! I know some shops don't like that, but I'd not be frequenting that shop in the first place. I always welcome the owner helping, be it sanding, or holding the end of a tape. It's a great way to get them involved and learning as well as educated about their airplane a bit. IT also helps with them not understanding how many hours it takes to do that cover job properly. I have some customers that don't want to go that route, and that's just fine too.
John
John

John the wax deal works. I fought it with Stits when they recommended that be done and asked if UV blockers could be incorporated into their products. But in the end I resigned myself to that annual procedure. Even an easy to apply liquid based product is better than none. Stits Polytone will suck up anything airborne as far as I can tell without a wax barrier.

On another matter we're hoping that Stewart's up here in the cold will hold up over time. Some local early adopters that didn't know better or failed to allow for proper curing have had problems with underlayment and surface blemishing. But a good friend just bought a PA-18 with that cover and it's holding up well so far. It was hangared for a few years but now lives outdoors so we'll see. The patches on mine done with Stewarts have stayed ok.

There's just too much potential long term toxicity associated with some coverings during application (typically isocyanate catalysts; https://www.bodyshopbusiness.com/your-l ... your-life/). They require a special paint booth and breathing apparatus plus skin protection. Not everyone can afford the setup and air exchange system in winter. Maybe they've changed the process.

Gary

Gary, I really like Stewart's due to the lack of chemicals. I recovered a Scout with it last winter and it is holding up quite well up in Watson Lake. It's on floats so lives outside. Really interested to see how itll hold up longer term. Will be using Stewart's on the Scout I'm building right now as well.
I know people say the poly fiber process isn't toxic either, but it sure smells, and requires make up air for painting. We asked poly fiber if they ever plan on changing away from a solvent based system but they seem to have no concern about it. So Stewart's it is.

I hope Dave doesn't mind a bit of thread widening but it still does apply. My test is to take the inspection cover cutouts from fabric airplanes and save some indoors then from the start expose the rest to the real world (leave in wing bottom for example until inspection required). Compare them over time for flex and delamination. I found that my PA-11 with yellow Stits Polytone the sealed cutouts went about twice as long before flex in cold (maybe 0*F) would crack them (2 years exposed; 4-5 indoors). Ten years after and both would not take a 180* easy bend by hand. I assume that was due to the eventual loss of flex solvents from each group.

Edit: Note that the ten years after test was done at room temps. By then the Polytone (a light coat of yellow over a white Poly base would split on both the weathered and protected samples. Both were unwaxed with Carnauba wax during their life.

I did the same years before with ceconite (not sure of the fabric was green underlayment under Randolph white dope). The unprotected lasted crack-free almost eight years and so did the covered ones when bent. On another Stits Polytone plane I bought the cracking started within five years but it was hangared some at the start of life.

Edit: None of these above were waxed with Carnauba wax according to my flight logbook notes.

I've done this test with Aerothane covered planes and they never cracked in folding years after cover, but that sample size was small (only two planes).

Gary

PA1195 wrote:
On another matter we're hoping that Stewart's up here in the cold will hold up over time. Some local early adopters that didn't know better or failed to allow for proper curing have had problems with underlayment and surface blemishing.

Gary

I was in on the developing stage of what is now Stewarts. I did the other systems and almost died from them, granted being pretty stupid about protecting myself, but it wasn't fun.
You're exactly right on the curing problem. I demonstrated that this year and could've easily had the same issues when we got some cool weather and high humidity when we sprayed the fill coat. It took a couple extra days to get it dry and ready. I always tell my students that they need to remember that we're evaporating water instead of a solvent, so it's a little different.
As far as flex, I've never seen anything as flexible!! I've got samples that I took to Oshkosh in '99, and they were wadded up in a little ball and straightened out I don't know how many times there, and how many times since (I do know they've been through the wash at least once in my pants pocket) and gave them to Andy to use in the booth at Sun n Fun last year. As far as I know, he's still using them just the same as I did.

That's some great backup info on the wax. I've been preaching that forever and it's tough to get some people to believe it.
Thanks,
John

John,

You are the exact type of A&P, IA mentor that this sport/industry needs. I applaud your style and willingness to help.

You have answered my questions and comments very well.

Thanks,

Dane