The turn down on the rib gives it more strength which is needed with the fabric 
covering. That extra strength and weight is not needed with the metal covering 
so the Aircoupe factory metal wings cannot have the metal removed and replaced 
with fabric.

Kevin1

--- In [email protected], iflysmo...@... wrote:
>
> Sorry Ercouper's, I hit reply instead of reply all.
> Lynn
>  
>   
> ____________________________________
>  From: IFLYSMODEL
> To: winterspatent...@...
> Sent: 9/10/2009  4:09:12 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time
> Subj: Re: {Disarmed} [ercoupe-tech]  Metal Wings are stronger.....
> 
> 
> No, Dave: I have worked on several Ercoupe and Aircoupe wings and they  all 
> follow the same design whether they have been converted to aluminum cover  
> or have the fabric. The only significant difference I have seen is that the  
> Aircoupe wings, which were metal covered to start with, have ribs that do 
> not  have the edges turned down. I suspect this is because the metal covering 
> does  not need the protection from the possible rubbing of the fabric and 
> rib faying  surface. I would also think that the ribs with the edges turned 
> down are  stronger than those that do not have that feature. Oh yes, the 1450 
> pound  airplanes have a slightly different attach fitting where it attaches 
> to the  center section. I suspect this was changed on purpose also.
>     I am attempting to enclose a picture of a  complete wing with the nose 
> rib metal covering removed. I am not sure this  will work as I seem to 
> remember that you have to do something different to  attach a picture when 
> using 
> the yahoo site. You can see from the picture that  the Ercoupe wing has many 
> fewer ribs than those of other type aircraft. The  Ercoupe wing ribs are 
> attached at an angle which makes the structure much  stronger. Also, when the 
> fabric is put on the Ercoupe wing, it is attached  with several (five I 
> believe) screws to each rib with a strip on the top to  ensure strength and 
> rigidity. This attachment is different on the other fabric  wings, where the 
> fabric must be rib stitched to each rib.
> Lynn Nelsen
>  
>  
> In a message dated 9/10/2009 3:28:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
> winterspatent...@... writes:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As  I understand the conversion, Ercoupe wings that are metalized are 
> actually  converted to a "semi-monocoque" structure, same as the old T-28.  
> Ribs  
> are actually removed in favor of the structural strength contributed by the 
>  aluminum skin. 
> Anybody  out there to confirm this? 
> Dave  W 
> =========]-(§)-[========== 
> //           \\            
>  
> From:  [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
> On  Behalf Of William R. Bayne
> Sent: Thursday, 10 September, 2009  13:54 PM
> To: Ercoupe Tech List
> Subject: Re: {Disarmed}  [ercoupe-tech] Metal Wings are stronger.....
> 
> I would suggest that any  engineering evaluation use the correct approach 
> in evaluating  "stronger".
> 
> Adding thin sheets to a wing structure already designed  and capable of 
> coping with the normal stresses of flight (plus a  considerable safety 
> factor)would add little, if any, to the overall load  carrying capacity of an 
> Ercoupe wing in terms of the additional stress said  could carry before it 
> failed 
> under load. The materials and procedures  utilized by the various STCs 
> presently installed or available does not  transform the Ercoupe wing 
> designed 
> for grade A cotton covering into a  monocoque structure as would seem to have 
> been inferred. 
> 
> "Monocoque"  construction is defined as "an aircraft structure in which the 
> outer  covering skin carries all or a major portion of the stresses".
> 
> The  internal structural components, metal skin thickness, rivet type, 
> size, and  spacing of a stressed skin wing design would be quite different, 
> and 
> likely  lighter.
> 
> Consider also these questions:
> 
> 1. What practical  purpose is served by increasing wing strength beyond 
> regulatory design  requirements?
> 
> 2. How much has the load capability of Ercoupe wing  design increased when 
> covered with modern synthetic fabrics of higher  tensional strength abd 
> durability than the original grade A  cotton?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> WRB
> 
> -- 
> 
> On Sep 10, 2009, at  13:05, Art Langston wrote: 
> 
> 
> Chris, could you please share the engineering  data with us and cite the 
> documentation where we can read it?
> 
> When  finished, I believe the Polyfiber may actually be stronger than the  
> aluminum. I've de-skinned Ercoupe wings, and the metal is very thin.  
> Polyfiber is tough.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Art N2666H
> 
> 
> Chris wrote:A  metal wing is stronger than a fabric one.  The metal 
> distributes the  loads over the surface.  Would anyone want to consider a 
> fabric 
> covered  fuselage? 
> 
> Chris
> Santa Cruz
> 99674  
> 
> 
> ‘--o-O-o--’
>


Reply via email to