Hi Bill,
The stainless panel overlays the aluminum from the top of the
instrument panel to Frame B at Frame B and is the upper skin forward to
the firewall (Frame A for reference).
Drawing 31245 (which should be available from Univair for such
retrofit) is a "production" drawing. That means that for quickest and
most economical production, there is no aluminum skin under the
stainless skin and normal rivets are used in installation because this
is done before the instrument panel or fuselage tank have been
installed.
If, as you have suggested, addition of the stainless WITHOUT removing
the existing "structural" aluminum skin between Frame B and the
firewall (by carefully drilling out the attaching rivets and then
completing reassembly using Cherry-style rivets) is appropriate with
merely a Log book entry as a minor non-structural alteration to enhance
safety a LOT more owners are likely to install the stainless than have
done so in the past.
It is important to keep in mind that such installation would NOT
presently be appropriate in the process of actually converting a 415-C
to a 415-D Model, in which case the procedure on said drawing is
mandatory until such time as a 337 or STC is approved allowing the
aluminum sheet to remain under the stainless.
Hope this helps,
William R. Bayne
.____|-(o)-|____.
(Copyright 2009)
--
On Jul 31, 2009, at 07:11, Bill BIGGS wrote:
I am a little confused. (or perhaps more than a little)
I did not find any installation instructions in the service or
bulletins manual for installing the stainless panel.
The newer parts manual references 3 skins: one from frame A to frame
C (alumininum, early models, I assume)
one from frame A to frame B (stainless, retrofit?) and one from frame
A to frame C ( stainless, later models)
When installing the stainless on a 415C, do you only put the
stainless from frame A to frame B, and does it overlay the existing
aluminum or replace it?
(Frame A is the firewall, frame C is the forward window channel and
frame B is the one in between, basically front of windshield)
Erco drawing 415-31245 should explain this but I can't find a copy.
Thanks,
Bill
To: [email protected]
From: [email protected]
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 23:46:55 -0500
Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] stainless steel skin
All,
I strongly advocate in favor of retrofitting the stainless panel on
each and every 415-C.
The originally approved ERCO Model 415 production prototype had a full
and proper
firewall as did the ERCO Model 310 experimental.
It used to be that people didn't buy flood insurance because it was
expensive, and then
wound up having to completely replace or rebuild their homes after
floods. Think about
how those people must have felt watching the news, knowing they did
not have insurance,
watching the rain come down, a wet forecast, and reports of rising
flood levels and
predictions that would put their home under water. At that time they
would have willingly
paid ANY price to get coverage they had previously rejected purchasing.
Airplane engine fires happen relatively rarely in peacetime...during
the Battle of Britain,
the thought that most terrified "the few" was the possibility of going
down as a "flamer".
The reason a "firewall" is required is to increase one's chances of
getting out of a plane
before an engine fire gets to the pilot. Being literally broiled to
death in the air is not a
swift and painless way to go. Quite the opposite, starting with
terrible skin damage.
With our fuselage tank in the cockpit with pilot and passenger,
anything that increases the
time it takes a fire to start boiling that fuel out of the vent is
worth more than gold. It doesn't
matter if the stainless "buys" you two minutes or twenty seconds IF
YOU SURVIVE. If you
don't, your heirs likely won't begrudge the $100 for the stainless.
IMHO, this is a perfect example of "penny wise and pound foolish"
thinking. I think as
"insurance" the stainless panel is one of the all time great "pay
once" values.
Regards,
William R. Bayne
.____|-(o)-|____.
(Copyright 2009)
--
On Jul 30, 2009, at 15:46, Roy Stubbs wrote:
Steel panel is in excess of $100 – I have one – never installed it.
Roy
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Caliendo Dan
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 3:50 PM
To: John Cooper
Cc: Techlist Ercoupe
Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] stainless steel skin
Importance: Low
I agree. If the fire is on the ground I suggest getting out of the
plane ASAP.
If the fire is in the air I wonder how much good the steel panel is
going to do you.
I hear the steel panel is expensive.... wonder what an engine fire
extinguisher would cost?
Dan C
On Jul 30, 2009, at 10:27 AM, John Cooper wrote:
Linda:
I think it is worth considering, but I wouldn't loose a whole lot of
sleep
over it. The only time it would be an issue is in the event of a fire
in the
engine compartment that cannot be controlled, by shutting the fuel off
(two
places!) So, first I'd ensure the fuel shutoffs work as expected.
John Cooper
Skyport Services
www.skyportservices.net
Windows Live™ Hotmail®: Celebrate the moment with your favorite sports
pics. Check it out.
