Refinishing gelcoat

[tango4]

It struck me the other day that the materials used to cover R/C models these
days could be used to 'refinish' ships on which the gelcoat had
deteriorated. We are already 'happy' to stick .5m wide pieces of orange tape
to the surfaces of gliders and do so with impunity.

Solarfilm ( a trade name ) can be obtained in 10m long rolls up to .7m
wide. I'm fairly certain that a roll would do the upper surface of a 15m
ships wing. If the wing was lightly sanded first to remove any raised edges
of the cracked gelcoat and to restore the profile, the material could be
laminated to the wing leaving an incredibly slick finish. These materials
are surprisingly srong and an entire roll weighs very little.

Even if the job was only good for a year or two it would be economically
viable. A refinish on a 15m ship these days runs from £5000 to £10000
depending on who, where and how its done. I'm sure a few hours work, perhaps
10 or 20 at the most would result in a job that would fool the best of us!
The materials for an upper surface recover would cost less than £100.

Continuing in the same vein, the BGA's recent investigations into collision
avoidance colour markings would appear to support the idea that the so
called flourescent tape applications that gained a lot of popularity over
the past few years are in fact the worst at making a visibility difference.
It would appear that a reflective finish may be the best at achieving this.
Solarfilm makes a chrome finish covering material that is almost a flexible
mirror, the stuff is very reflective. Adding a band of this to a wing and
the fuselage or the fin could be very effective.

Ian

[Bill Daniels]

"tango4" > wrote in message
...
> It struck me the other day that the materials used to cover R/C models
these
> days could be used to 'refinish' ships on which the gelcoat had
> deteriorated. We are already 'happy' to stick .5m wide pieces of orange
tape
> to the surfaces of gliders and do so with impunity.
>
> Solarfilm ( a trade name ) can be obtained in 10m long rolls up to .7m
> wide. I'm fairly certain that a roll would do the upper surface of a 15m
> ships wing. If the wing was lightly sanded first to remove any raised
edges
> of the cracked gelcoat and to restore the profile, the material could be
> laminated to the wing leaving an incredibly slick finish. These materials
> are surprisingly srong and an entire roll weighs very little.
>
> Even if the job was only good for a year or two it would be economically
> viable. A refinish on a 15m ship these days runs from £5000 to £10000
> depending on who, where and how its done. I'm sure a few hours work,
perhaps
> 10 or 20 at the most would result in a job that would fool the best of us!
> The materials for an upper surface recover would cost less than £100.
>
> Continuing in the same vein, the BGA's recent investigations into
collision
> avoidance colour markings would appear to support the idea that the so
> called flourescent tape applications that gained a lot of popularity over
> the past few years are in fact the worst at making a visibility
difference.
> It would appear that a reflective finish may be the best at achieving
this.
> Solarfilm makes a chrome finish covering material that is almost a
flexible
> mirror, the stuff is very reflective. Adding a band of this to a wing and
> the fuselage or the fin could be very effective.
>
> Ian

Ian, I think you are on to something.

I read several years ago about an aircraft finishing system that involved an
thin film that was heat shrunk onto metal skins covering joints, rivets and
all.

Bill Daniels

[Peter Seddon]

> Ian, I think you are on to something.
>
> I read several years ago about an aircraft finishing system that involved
an
> thin film that was heat shrunk onto metal skins covering joints, rivets
and
> all.
>
> Bill Daniels
>

Solarfilm has been around for years so the available info on its propeties
should be somewere on the net. I can vouch for its strength, I've seen balsa
models after a crash that look like a bag of bits, the film virtualy intact.

Peter S
DLA

[John Galloway]

Bill Daniels wrote:

'I read several years ago about an aircraft finishing
system that involved an
thin film that was heat shrunk onto metal skins covering
joints, rivets and all.'


To take Bill's point further, if the film could not
be shape changed somehow then there is no way you could
get span length roll of film to fit tightly to the
curves of a glider wing along its full length.

John Galloway

[tango4]

John,

The application of heat, a little more than the average hairdryer delivers,
both shrinks the film and activates a quite powerfull adhesive that is on
the underside of the film. The adhesive is strong enough to remove the
surface of underlying balsa structures when trying to remove the film to
repair an RC model..

I'll have a word with Jim Hammerton and see if he'll let us try it out on
the Ventus ( which has some surface cracking )

Ian



"John Galloway" > wrote in
message ...
> Bill Daniels wrote:
>
> 'I read several years ago about an aircraft finishing
> system that involved an
> thin film that was heat shrunk onto metal skins covering
> joints, rivets and all.'
>
>
> To take Bill's point further, if the film could not
> be shape changed somehow then there is no way you could
> get span length roll of film to fit tightly to the
> curves of a glider wing along its full length.
>
> John Galloway
>
>
>

[BTIZ]

I like the idea of a reflective band.. wing flash as it were instead of the
bright orange.. (not that we use that in the US).. information from the
major manufactures would be needed on effects of wings covered with such..
many only allow a certain percentage of color other than white because of
the detrimental effects of colors absorbing heat at a different rate and the
effect on it's wing strength,

BT

"tango4" > wrote in message
...
> It struck me the other day that the materials used to cover R/C models
these
> days could be used to 'refinish' ships on which the gelcoat had
> deteriorated. We are already 'happy' to stick .5m wide pieces of orange
tape
> to the surfaces of gliders and do so with impunity.
>
> Solarfilm ( a trade name ) can be obtained in 10m long rolls up to .7m
> wide. I'm fairly certain that a roll would do the upper surface of a 15m
> ships wing. If the wing was lightly sanded first to remove any raised
edges
> of the cracked gelcoat and to restore the profile, the material could be
> laminated to the wing leaving an incredibly slick finish. These materials
> are surprisingly srong and an entire roll weighs very little.
>
> Even if the job was only good for a year or two it would be economically
> viable. A refinish on a 15m ship these days runs from £5000 to £10000
> depending on who, where and how its done. I'm sure a few hours work,
perhaps
> 10 or 20 at the most would result in a job that would fool the best of us!
> The materials for an upper surface recover would cost less than £100.
>
> Continuing in the same vein, the BGA's recent investigations into
collision
> avoidance colour markings would appear to support the idea that the so
> called flourescent tape applications that gained a lot of popularity over
> the past few years are in fact the worst at making a visibility
difference.
> It would appear that a reflective finish may be the best at achieving
this.
> Solarfilm makes a chrome finish covering material that is almost a
flexible
> mirror, the stuff is very reflective. Adding a band of this to a wing and
> the fuselage or the fin could be very effective.
>
> Ian
>
>

[tango4]

I think that reflective is likely to absorb less energy than even white, but
yes you are right someone would need to test it!

Ian

[Eric Greenwell]

In article >,
says...
> It struck me the other day that the materials used to cover R/C models these
> days could be used to 'refinish' ships on which the gelcoat had
> deteriorated. We are already 'happy' to stick .5m wide pieces of orange tape
> to the surfaces of gliders and do so with impunity.
>
> Solarfilm ( a trade name ) can be obtained in 10m long rolls up to .7m
> wide. I'm fairly certain that a roll would do the upper surface of a 15m
> ships wing. If the wing was lightly sanded first to remove any raised edges
> of the cracked gelcoat and to restore the profile, the material could be
> laminated to the wing leaving an incredibly slick finish. These materials
> are surprisingly srong and an entire roll weighs very little.

I've had some Monokote (Solarfilm equivalent) and a wing tip sitting
on my bench for several months now, planning to experiment with
covering up small dents in wings, bridging the depression caused by a
shrinking spar, and just adding some decoration. Ian's posting
motivated me to actually try sticking a few pieces on to the wing tip
(left over from fitting winglets).

It's going to take some practice to get it on smoothly, I can see.
Part of the problem is the temperature required to activate the
adhesive (instructions say to set the iron at 275 F), which is well
above the epoxy limit. Another problem is avoiding air bubbles when
covering large areas. I'm sure these can be dealt with.

The biggest problem I can see is ensuring that the covering doesn't
peel up in flight, perhaps rendering an aileron or elevator unusable.
Determining the effects of long term exposure (longer than a year,
say) will be important, as gliders typically spend far more time
outdoors than model airplanes, so their experience might not be a good
guide. What will sunlight, desert temperatures and wave flight chills
do to the material when applied over fiberglass or carbon structures?

Even if you convince yourself it's safe and sane, regulatory and
insurance issues need to be dealt with. In the US, a covering on the
flying surfaces might need an FAA approval, and I'd like to be there
when the first pilot goes to the insurance company and explains how he
is going to cover his glider with a plastic sheet, wants to know how
that might affect his coverage.

So, maybe someone with some wrecked wing parts lying around can try
the idea, and set the panels outside for exposure testing. Flight
testing with a full chord, 10 inch wide strip of white material near
the wing root probably wouldn't be hazardous, even if the strip
peeled. Ditto for pieces on the turtle deck. Or maybe on a spoiler cap
- if it peels up and acts like a small spoiler, it's in the right
place!

--
!Replace DECIMAL.POINT in my e-mail address with just a . to reply
directly

Eric Greenwell
Richland, WA (USA)

[Mark]

"Peter Seddon" > wrote in message news:<3fa3cff6I once owned an ultralight aircraft called "American Falcon". Some of you may recall their adverts on the back of some flying mag , with Chuck Yaeger' face endorcing the little high wing canard.

It's wing is/was covered in Tedlar. This is a Du-pont product that is
stuck to the top of ribs etc with a foam backed doubled sided tape,
and subsequently heat shrunk. i recovered the wing myself with the
help of a couple of friends.

My guess is that with a strip of polyester doubled sided tape along
the trailing edge, top and bottom just ahead of the aielrons etc, a
perimeter of this around the airbrake box, place some more around the
root and tip, this would do a great job.

Tedlar is used as a decorative/protective coating on all those
compound panels you see around windows in 737's etc.

It has a huge shring rate, and would certainly give a wrinkle free
finish if applied correctly. Better still the roll of Tedlar I got (in
white ) was 1.5m wide.


Cheers

Mark

>...
> > Ian, I think you are on to something.
> >
> > I read several years ago about an aircraft finishing system that involved
> an
> > thin film that was heat shrunk onto metal skins covering joints, rivets
> and
> > all.
> >
> > Bill Daniels
> >
>
> Solarfilm has been around for years so the available info on its propeties
> should be somewere on the net. I can vouch for its strength, I've seen balsa
> models after a crash that look like a bag of bits, the film virtualy intact.
>
> Peter S
> DLA

[Vaughn]

"John Galloway" > wrote in
message ...
> Bill Daniels wrote:
>
> 'I read several years ago about an aircraft finishing
> system that involved an
> thin film that was heat shrunk onto metal skins covering
> joints, rivets and all.'
>
>
> To take Bill's point further, if the film could not
> be shape changed somehow then there is no way you could
> get span length roll of film to fit tightly to the
> curves of a glider wing along its full length.

I think that may depend on how much the stuff will shrink.

Is this material anything like the stuff they use for those advertising
wraps on busses?

Vaughn

[Eric Greenwell]

In article >,
says...
> To take Bill's point further, if the film could not
> be shape changed somehow then there is no way you could
> get span length roll of film to fit tightly to the
> curves of a glider wing along its full length.

The material under discussion, with brand names like Monokote and
Solarfilm, can be formed around compound curves on a model airplane,
which are far sharper than those on a full size glider. It's very
thin, about 0.002 inches. See www.monokote.com
--
!Replace DECIMAL.POINT in my e-mail address with just a . to reply
directly

Eric Greenwell
Richland, WA (USA)

[Scott Correa]

I din't know a lot about refinishing sailplane wings, but I do
refinish many vacuum forming tools. When I encounter
checking, gelcoat cracks or surface irregularitys that
produce markoff, I use catalized surfacing primers for cars.

We shoot it onto the surface and wipe it into the cracks/fissures
with our hands using gloves a couple coats does it. It sands well
and gets you to 600 grit smooth really quickly.

Why aren't we doing this. It seems that you could DA sand
the wings in a few hours, shoot 200 bucks worth of primer,
sand the primer in a few hours and be ready for topcoat.

Topcoats are about 150 a gallon ready to shoot.
Colorsand after paint andf you are done..........

So 600 bucks for materials and 10 hours each wing.
10 hours on the fuse/vert 4 hrs rudder, 4 hrs stab.
4 hrs each flap, 2 hrs each alerion 8 hrs diasaaembly
8 hrs reassembly.

66 hrs labor + 600 material....... 3100 for a repaint with auto paint??
337 field approval, logbook entry and move on.

Just thinking out loud.....

Scott

[Silent Flyer]

Solarfilm does not adhere as easily to fibreglass or resin covered surfaces
as it does to balsa. The adhesive soaks into the balsa surface to form a
very good bond but not into the resin. To overcome this the manufacturers
recommend using a coat of " Prymol" first in order to etch the surface
before applying the Solarfilm.

DB


tango4 > wrote in message
...
> John,
>
> The application of heat, a little more than the average hairdryer
delivers,
> both shrinks the film and activates a quite powerfull adhesive that is on
> the underside of the film. The adhesive is strong enough to remove the
> surface of underlying balsa structures when trying to remove the film to
> repair an RC model..
>
> I'll have a word with Jim Hammerton and see if he'll let us try it out on
> the Ventus ( which has some surface cracking )
>
> Ian
>
>
>
> "John Galloway" > wrote in
> message ...
> > Bill Daniels wrote:
> >
> > 'I read several years ago about an aircraft finishing
> > system that involved an
> > thin film that was heat shrunk onto metal skins covering
> > joints, rivets and all.'
> >
> >
> > To take Bill's point further, if the film could not
> > be shape changed somehow then there is no way you could
> > get span length roll of film to fit tightly to the
> > curves of a glider wing along its full length.
> >
> > John Galloway
> >
> >
> >
>
>

[Bill Daniels]

"Scott Correa" > wrote in message
...
> I din't know a lot about refinishing sailplane wings, but I do
> refinish many vacuum forming tools. When I encounter
> checking, gelcoat cracks or surface irregularitys that
> produce markoff, I use catalized surfacing primers for cars.
>
> We shoot it onto the surface and wipe it into the cracks/fissures
> with our hands using gloves a couple coats does it. It sands well
> and gets you to 600 grit smooth really quickly.
>
> Why aren't we doing this. It seems that you could DA sand
> the wings in a few hours, shoot 200 bucks worth of primer,
> sand the primer in a few hours and be ready for topcoat.
>
> Topcoats are about 150 a gallon ready to shoot.
> Colorsand after paint andf you are done..........
>
> So 600 bucks for materials and 10 hours each wing.
> 10 hours on the fuse/vert 4 hrs rudder, 4 hrs stab.
> 4 hrs each flap, 2 hrs each alerion 8 hrs diasaaembly
> 8 hrs reassembly.
>
> 66 hrs labor + 600 material....... 3100 for a repaint with auto paint??
> 337 field approval, logbook entry and move on.
>
> Just thinking out loud.....
>
> Scott
>
Interesting stuff, Scott.

Got some brand names?

Bill Daniels

[JJ Sinclair]

I think you are on the right track, Scott. I would think that epoxy squeegeed
(sp) into the cracks would have a better chance of lasting. Then prime and
paint with Uurathane which is softer than gel-coat and you might just get your
wings refinished for about half price. The problem with a glider repair shop
trying something like this, is they would have to stand behind their work and
nobody want's to take the chance.> I din't know a lot about refinishing
sailplane wings, but I do
>> refinish many vacuum forming tools. When I encounter
>> checking, gelcoat cracks or surface irregularitys that
>> produce markoff, I use catalized surfacing primers for cars.
>>
>> We shoot it onto the surface and wipe it into the cracks/fissures
>> with our hands using gloves a couple coats does it. It sands well
>> and gets you to 600 grit smooth really quickly.
>>
>> Why aren't we doing this. It seems that you could DA sand
>> the wings in a few hours, shoot 200 bucks worth of primer,
>> sand the primer in a few hours and be ready for topcoat.
>>
>> Topcoats are about 150 a gallon ready to shoot.
>> Colorsand after paint andf you are done..........
>>
>> So 600 bucks for materials and 10 hours each wing.
>> 10 hours on the fuse/vert 4 hrs rudder, 4 hrs stab.
>> 4 hrs each flap, 2 hrs each alerion 8 hrs diasaaembly
>> 8 hrs reassembly.
>>
>> 66 hrs labor + 600 material....... 3100 for a repaint with auto paint??
>> 337 field approval, logbook entry and move on.
>>
>> Just thinking out loud.....
>>
>> Scott

JJ Sinclair

[Mark]

I once owned an ultralight aircraft called "American Falcon". Some of
you may recall their adverts on the back of some flying mag , with
Chuck Yaeger's face endorcing the little high wing canard.

It's wing is/was covered in Tedlar. This is a Du-pont product that is
stuck to the top of ribs etc with a foam backed doubled sided tape,
and subsequently heat shrunk. I re-covered the wing myself with the
help of a couple of friends.Any joints are done with a simple 2" wide
lap with an 8 thou' 1" wide polyester double sided tape.

My guess is that with a strip of polyester doubled sided tape along
the trailing edge, top and bottom just ahead of the ailerons etc, a
perimeter of this around the airbrake box, place some more around the
root and tip, this would do a great job.

Tedlar is used as a decorative/protective coating on all those
compound panels you see around windows in 737's etc.

It has a huge shring rate, and would certainly give a wrinkle free
finish if applied correctly. Better still the roll of Tedlar I got (in
white ) was 1.5m wide.



Cheers

Mark

[Brian Case]

> Why aren't we doing this. It seems that you could DA sand
> the wings in a few hours, shoot 200 bucks worth of primer,
> sand the primer in a few hours and be ready for topcoat.


The issue of removing the old Gel Coat is generally a much bigger job
that most people realize the Gel Coat the quite hard and the composite
underneath is generally realtively soft and thin. So once you cut
through the Gel Coat the DA tends to quickly cut through the 1st
layer(s) of the composity very quickly weakening the structure. So
usually while a DA is carefully used to remove the majority of the
Gelcoat the last 10% of of it need to be carefully removed by hand
sanding to avoid damaging the composite.

Secondly those cracks in the Gel Coat as the get worse will transfer
into the Composit actually causing cracks in the Composite structure.
When removing the Gel Coat this can easily be seen as small white
cracks in the Epoxy itself. I have seen one aircraft that the 1st
layer of fiberglass had to be replaced because on all the cracks in
the fiberglass.

Even with Gelcoat the Materials are only a very small fraction of the
cost. The Majority of the cost is labor of removing the old Gel Coat.

Brian

[JJ Sinclair]

Greg wrote>>>>>>>>>>>>
>I had an LS-3 that was refinished this way (or so I was told). The
>cracks returned after a few years.

So much for that idea. Do you know who refinished your LS-3, Greg? I know of an
ASK-21 that lasted pretty well for about 8 or 9 years, that had been refinished
this way and left out all the time. Obviously, all the lose stuff must be
removed, but my thought was to leave the small cracks that didn't go all the
way down to the glass. By using a long air-board, the contouring would be
munimal, if say 50% of the old gel-coat was left.


JJ Sinclair

[Greg Arnold]

I had an LS-3 that was refinished this way (or so I was told). The
cracks returned after a few years.


JJ Sinclair wrote:

> I think you are on the right track, Scott. I would think that epoxy squeegeed
> (sp) into the cracks would have a better chance of lasting. Then prime and
> paint with Uurathane which is softer than gel-coat and you might just get your
> wings refinished for about half price. The problem with a glider repair shop
> trying something like this, is they would have to stand behind their work and
> nobody want's to take the chance.> I din't know a lot about refinishing
> sailplane wings, but I do
>
>>>refinish many vacuum forming tools. When I encounter
>>>checking, gelcoat cracks or surface irregularitys that
>>>produce markoff, I use catalized surfacing primers for cars.
>>>
>>>We shoot it onto the surface and wipe it into the cracks/fissures
>>>with our hands using gloves a couple coats does it. It sands well
>>>and gets you to 600 grit smooth really quickly.
>>>
>>>Why aren't we doing this. It seems that you could DA sand
>>>the wings in a few hours, shoot 200 bucks worth of primer,
>>>sand the primer in a few hours and be ready for topcoat.
>>>
>>>Topcoats are about 150 a gallon ready to shoot.
>>>Colorsand after paint andf you are done..........
>>>
>>>So 600 bucks for materials and 10 hours each wing.
>>>10 hours on the fuse/vert 4 hrs rudder, 4 hrs stab.
>>>4 hrs each flap, 2 hrs each alerion 8 hrs diasaaembly
>>>8 hrs reassembly.
>>>
>>>66 hrs labor + 600 material....... 3100 for a repaint with auto paint??
>>>337 field approval, logbook entry and move on.
>>>
>>>Just thinking out loud.....
>>>
>>>Scott
>
>
> JJ Sinclair

[Duane Eisenbeiss]

"Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
.. .
>
>...................
> It's going to take some practice to get it on smoothly, I can see.
> Part of the problem is the temperature required to activate the
> adhesive (instructions say to set the iron at 275 F), which is well
> above the epoxy limit. Another problem is avoiding air bubbles when
> covering large areas. I'm sure these can be dealt with.
>
> The biggest problem I can see is ensuring that the covering doesn't
> peel up in flight, perhaps rendering an aileron or elevator unusable.
> Determining the effects of long term exposure (longer than a year,
> say) will be important, as gliders typically spend far more time
> outdoors than model airplanes, so their experience might not be a good
> guide. What will sunlight, desert temperatures and wave flight chills
> do to the material when applied over fiberglass or carbon structures?
>
> > Eric Greenwell
> Richland, WA (USA)

To answer some of your questions, I used such material on my Discus back in
1985. It was still intact when I sold it 16 years later.

First, rather than Monokote, use Econokote. Made by the same company but
requires a much lower temperature for application. Econokote (vice
Monokote) is recommended for covering over solid surfaces. Also, Econokote
is more easily stretched around curves. Solarfilm also has a lower
application temperature. With Monokote, the required bonding temperature
heats up the surface (Fiberglas wing in this case). The wing, which has
mass, holds the heat which results in many bubbles of the film. The lower
temp film is much less susceptible to bubbling. If a small bubble does
occur, you can puncture it with a pin and iron it smooth.

There is no real need to worry about the heat damaging the wing. The iron
should not be held in contact long enough to really heat the wing. Due to
the difference in mass of the film and the wing surface the film is heated
to the proper temp before the wing surface gets too hot.

What I used the film for was to make an "omega" seal in the aileron gap.
One side of a strip of film (about 1/2 inch wide) was ironed to the wing,
then looped into the gap, and about 1/2 inch of the other side ironed to the
aileron. Of course the strip of film was the length of the aileron. After
16 years there was no tendency to peel. I did this on the bottom of the
wing, no sun. However, I have not seen any bad effect on models that have
been in the sun for extended periods. Also, I did only small (two1/2 inch
wide) strips. Ironing the film on a large area (complete wing) would be
much, much more difficult to control bubbling and wrinkles. The film does
shrink with temp, however, when it is heated the adhesive is also heated
(and melts) and sticks to whatever it touches. Therefore, when doing a
large surface, it is difficult to heat the film without it touching the
surface that is being covered. Not impossible, just difficult.

Duane

[B Lacovara]

Historically we have shown in the composites industry that you can't
effectively "fill" gel coat cracks with another coating, or simply cover them
up. In examining the mechanism of gel coat cracking two issues become apparent:
In the case of hairline cracks, the inherent viscosity and surface tension
characteristics of most coatings will not allow them to penetrate the fracture
area. If the crack is large enough that a coating will penetrate the fracture
cavity, the bond strength between the coating and the crack sidewalls is not
sufficient to prevent the development of two new micro-cracks on each sidewall.


The only effective method of preventing crack propagation is to remove the
crack in it's entirety by sanding to the bottom of the fracture area.

The use of thermoplastic shrink film over a gel coated surface is an intriguing
idea. Tedlar, in particular, performs very well in long term outdoor exposure.
However, keep in mind that it would mask the cracks in the gel coat that
potentially could propagate into the laminate substrate. I would have the same
level of concern about hidden cracks in composites as I have with hidden
corrosion in metal aircraft.

Bob Lacovara

[tango4]

"B Lacovara" > wrote in message
...
> Historically we have shown in the composites industry that you can't
> effectively "fill" gel coat cracks with another coating, or simply cover
them
> up. In examining the mechanism of gel coat cracking two issues become
apparent:
> In the case of hairline cracks, the inherent viscosity and surface tension
> characteristics of most coatings will not allow them to penetrate the
fracture
> area. If the crack is large enough that a coating will penetrate the
fracture
> cavity, the bond strength between the coating and the crack sidewalls is
not
> sufficient to prevent the development of two new micro-cracks on each
sidewall.
>
>
> The only effective method of preventing crack propagation is to remove the
> crack in it's entirety by sanding to the bottom of the fracture area.
>
> The use of thermoplastic shrink film over a gel coated surface is an
intriguing
> idea. Tedlar, in particular, performs very well in long term outdoor
exposure.
> However, keep in mind that it would mask the cracks in the gel coat that
> potentially could propagate into the laminate substrate. I would have the
same
> level of concern about hidden cracks in composites as I have with hidden
> corrosion in metal aircraft.
>
> Bob Lacovara
>

If the 'process' was to first remove the cracks by sanding back to the
substrate, then fill and flat locally with a polyester filler and then to
apply film to the entire surface then perhaps we might have a solution?

The biggest time consumer I find is the manual flatting and polishing
required with either Gel or paint finishes.

Ian