But a relevant point still is:
“Just as well there isn't a 35 year life limit on all the aluminium powered
aircraft like Cessnas, Pipers, Beechcraft etc. I'll say it again: There are no
engineering reasons for this life limit on aluminium aircraft. They can fatigue
or corrode (or both) and this can be inspected for.”
Hangar Queen compared with a club aircraft?
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: DMcD
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 9:34 AM
To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] IS29D life extension
>>If we had an an organisation in Australia that was actually interested in
>>promoting gliding and helping people do it easier and cheaper, things might
>>be different.
Easier and cheaper? Name me one alu airframe which is lower
maintenance than a glass glider!
Promoting gliding? Who turns up at a club, having seen pictures of
shiny glass gliders in promo material, and happily climbs into a
dusty, buckled and faded antique?
I'm sure that with the limited resources available to the GFA, they
have no time to chase around trying to keep a handful of relics in the
air. I know that most busy clubs have better things to do than to keep
alu gliders in the air compared with glass ones.
It takes about 1 day a year to maintain a K21 and two or more weeks to
maintain a KRO3.
I know that for smaller clubs this is a difficult scenario but I don't
believe the small gliding movement in Australia can have one foot
nailed to the ground by trying to keep heritage aircraft flying.
D
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
