Plastic Interior Parts?

[Mike Spera]

O.K. With the new seat belts on order and the pending order of the
carpet, wall kit, and seat covers, the last 2 items are the headliner
and the window surround plastic. The headliner is in good shape with
only a slight variation in the color here and there. I will do the "Kiwi
shoe polish trick" for that. Last part (aside from painting the seat
frames) is the plastic. Yes, I already looked at Plane Plastics and
Vantage. Totally, absolutely, criminally outrageous pricing. Ten buck
parts selling for two hundred dollars. Even with the "airplane"
surcharge, an entire Piper remake should only cost about $200. There
ain't any certification, tracking, insurance, or other "excuse" for
these prices.

Any other suppliers out there that are not smoking crack? If not, I will
take them out, repair the one or 2 cracks, paint them, and put 'em back
in. 5 hours labor, 1 $4 can of white plastic spray paint, a dab of
epoxy, and a couple dozen new chrome #6 screws and finishing washers.
Even if I price my time at $100/hour, it is still WAY less expensive
than what these pirates want.

Thanks,
Mike

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

[Dave]

That's what we did Mike, with our 172..

The paint to use is called SEM, designed for painting plastic. We HAD
to buy one peice ($$$$) - cause most of it was missing...

We get compliments on our interior all the time.

Total cost was about $300 CDN, including the 175 dollar new part...

We repaired the cracks by epoxying fiberglass cloth reinforcement on
the back, finished with autobody filler/putty and painted.

Dave

On 27 Mar 2005 13:30:13 GMT, Mike Spera > wrote:

>O.K. With the new seat belts on order and the pending order of the
>carpet, wall kit, and seat covers, the last 2 items are the headliner
>and the window surround plastic. The headliner is in good shape with
>only a slight variation in the color here and there. I will do the "Kiwi
>shoe polish trick" for that. Last part (aside from painting the seat
>frames) is the plastic. Yes, I already looked at Plane Plastics and
>Vantage. Totally, absolutely, criminally outrageous pricing. Ten buck
>parts selling for two hundred dollars. Even with the "airplane"
>surcharge, an entire Piper remake should only cost about $200. There
>ain't any certification, tracking, insurance, or other "excuse" for
>these prices.
>
>Any other suppliers out there that are not smoking crack? If not, I will
>take them out, repair the one or 2 cracks, paint them, and put 'em back
>in. 5 hours labor, 1 $4 can of white plastic spray paint, a dab of
>epoxy, and a couple dozen new chrome #6 screws and finishing washers.
>Even if I price my time at $100/hour, it is still WAY less expensive
>than what these pirates want.
>
>Thanks,
>Mike
>
>__________________________________________________ _____________________________
>Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
> <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
>

[Mike W.]

Airplane parts arent alway expensive because of certification, it's the
limited demand that makes them pricey.

"Mike Spera" > wrote in message
...
> O.K. With the new seat belts on order and the pending order of the
> carpet, wall kit, and seat covers, the last 2 items are the headliner
> and the window surround plastic. The headliner is in good shape with
> only a slight variation in the color here and there. I will do the "Kiwi
> shoe polish trick" for that. Last part (aside from painting the seat
> frames) is the plastic. Yes, I already looked at Plane Plastics and
> Vantage. Totally, absolutely, criminally outrageous pricing. Ten buck
> parts selling for two hundred dollars. Even with the "airplane"
> surcharge, an entire Piper remake should only cost about $200. There
> ain't any certification, tracking, insurance, or other "excuse" for
> these prices.
>
> Any other suppliers out there that are not smoking crack? If not, I will
> take them out, repair the one or 2 cracks, paint them, and put 'em back
> in. 5 hours labor, 1 $4 can of white plastic spray paint, a dab of
> epoxy, and a couple dozen new chrome #6 screws and finishing washers.
> Even if I price my time at $100/hour, it is still WAY less expensive
> than what these pirates want.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
>
__________________________________________________ __________________________
___
> Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
> <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
<><><><><><><><>
>

[tom418]

I second what Dave said about SEM paints. They are great. For fixing cracks,
or missing pieces, you might want to try the fiberglass/epoxy/silk approach
(all these materials are available in hobby stores, etc). Time consuming,
but cheaper than new parts.

When I did the interior of my Seneca, the one part I didn't do was to
replace the overhead airt vent outlets. $550 EACH!
"Mike Spera" > wrote in message
...
> O.K. With the new seat belts on order and the pending order of the
> carpet, wall kit, and seat covers, the last 2 items are the headliner
> and the window surround plastic. The headliner is in good shape with
> only a slight variation in the color here and there. I will do the "Kiwi
> shoe polish trick" for that. Last part (aside from painting the seat
> frames) is the plastic. Yes, I already looked at Plane Plastics and
> Vantage. Totally, absolutely, criminally outrageous pricing. Ten buck
> parts selling for two hundred dollars. Even with the "airplane"
> surcharge, an entire Piper remake should only cost about $200. There
> ain't any certification, tracking, insurance, or other "excuse" for
> these prices.
>
> Any other suppliers out there that are not smoking crack? If not, I will
> take them out, repair the one or 2 cracks, paint them, and put 'em back
> in. 5 hours labor, 1 $4 can of white plastic spray paint, a dab of
> epoxy, and a couple dozen new chrome #6 screws and finishing washers.
> Even if I price my time at $100/hour, it is still WAY less expensive
> than what these pirates want.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
>
__________________________________________________ __________________________
___
> Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
> <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source
<><><><><><><><>
>

[[email protected]]

I feel your pain. We just placed an order with Plane Parts for some
interior items for our Arrow. One overhead vent console, 2 louvered vents,
4 floor vent cups, one floor rib cover. Total cost: $333.60 plus shipping.

But the reason the cost is so high isn't just (or even primarily) the
"aviation surcharge". Its the exceedingly low volume in which these parts
are produced. Take the overhead console, for example. Plane Parts may sell
just one or two per month of the particular part we needed. Yet, to design
and make the tooling they need to produce the part may have cost several
thousand dollars.

And have you priced automotive plastic parts lately? The headlamp lens for
a typical car may cost well over a hundred bucks. If it's a Mercedes the
price may be several hundred.

--
-Elliott Drucker

[Dave]

OK..... I will fess up! :)

All the materials used (except the SEM paint) came from a hobby
workshop that is prolific in the production of Radio Control model
Aircraft...

(mine) :)

Dave


On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:02:52 -0500, "tom418"
> wrote:

>I second what Dave said about SEM paints. They are great. For fixing cracks,
>or missing pieces, you might want to try the fiberglass/epoxy/silk approach
>(all these materials are available in hobby stores, etc). Time consuming,
>but cheaper than new parts.
>

[Mike Spera]

Intellectually, I know that the low volume radically affects the
economics, but it really is hard to get over. When I think back on what
it costs to have an injection mold made... well they ARE really
expensive. Also, given the HUNDREDS of little bits and pieces needed for
all these planes and models, each requiring a different mold. O.K.

I'm over it (I'm still going to repaint the old stuff!!!).

As for automotive plastic, I usually buy aftermarket. Most of it is
pretty good.

Mike



wrote:

> I feel your pain. We just placed an order with Plane Parts for some
> interior items for our Arrow. One overhead vent console, 2 louvered vents,
> 4 floor vent cups, one floor rib cover. Total cost: $333.60 plus shipping.
>
> But the reason the cost is so high isn't just (or even primarily) the
> "aviation surcharge". Its the exceedingly low volume in which these parts
> are produced. Take the overhead console, for example. Plane Parts may sell
> just one or two per month of the particular part we needed. Yet, to design
> and make the tooling they need to produce the part may have cost several
> thousand dollars.
>
> And have you priced automotive plastic parts lately? The headlamp lens for
> a typical car may cost well over a hundred bucks. If it's a Mercedes the
> price may be several hundred.
>

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

[plasticguy]

"Mike Spera" > wrote in message
...
Yes, I already looked at Plane Plastics and
> Vantage. Totally, absolutely, criminally outrageous pricing. Ten buck
> parts selling for two hundred dollars. Even with the "airplane" surcharge,
> an entire Piper remake should only cost about $200. There ain't any
> certification, tracking, insurance, or other "excuse" for these prices.

Well Mike, I see we disagree.
First I take exception to the term PIRATE.
(but Pirate Plastics would be a cool name )
I manufacture low volume plastic parts for a living.
So lets look at a few things.

Tool amortization............I own the tools to make the parts,l they aren't
cheap.
Machine amortization......I own the capital equipment to make the parts,
they aren't cheap
LABOR.........................I have the skilled people who make the parts.
People aren't cheap
Overhead.......................I get to pay all the taxes, utility, rent,
advertising and ALL the other costs.
Material cost..................Plastic is "solid oil" it isn't cheap. I've
seen 2 price increases this year alone
the first was 21.5% the second was ONLY
15%
PMA compliance costs.... I get to reverse engineer and create a drawing for
EACH PART, PROVE IT FITS to the local MIDO guys, have it added to my PMA
supplement, specify the material used, identify the vendor of the material,
maintain lot tracability, comply with the Fastener Quality Act, cockpit
flammability standards, VOC emission limits from the EPA and solid waste
regulatory folks. I get to maintain a Quality Program and have everything in
order for periodic inspections by the MIDO guys.

THEN I GET TO ADD PROFIT and watch people complain about why stuff costs
what it does.

Scott.

[Jay Honeck]

> THEN I GET TO ADD PROFIT and watch people complain about why stuff costs
> what it does.

Ah, welcome to the business world. :-)

I, for one, am VERY thankful that you guys are out there making these parts.
If we had to rely on Piper (for example), we'd be paying exponentially
more -- and they'd be just as crappy as the originals.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jim Burns]

Ditto! Some day soon, our plane will need a few of those $200 each window
surround moldings. I'm not looking forward to the day and I'll do
everything possible to put it off as long as possible. I'm just thankful
that you CAN add a profit to your parts and are able to stay in business.
Think of what would happen if Wal Mart suddenly started carrying them and
demanded that you cut your prices down to unprofitable levels. Just ask me
how I know, but give me the chance to have a few beers before you want me to
respond.
Jim

[Michael]

> I will take them out, repair the one or 2 cracks, paint them, and put
'em back in.

What you are suggesting will work, but it won't look wonderful.

When I redid the upholstery in my PA-30, I had an automotive upholstery
guy repair the plastic pieces and cover them over with automotive
headliner material. This is a soft, plushy, thin fabric that comes
with an industry standard (ASTM/SAE) fire resistant label, making it
legal to use in Part 23 aircraft not certificated in the commuter
category and not used in Part-135 ops (I will gladly email anyone a PDF
scan of a letter from the FAA to this effect, originally obtained by
our own Rod Farlee) and it turns what would otherwise look like cheap,
repaired, painted plastic into something that looks like it came out of
a midrange Japanese sedan.

I can't tell you exactly what this cost, but it could not have been
much because it was part of a package that included (labor and
materials) having the guy cover my plastic as described, repair and
upholster my aluminum side panels, sew me a headliner, strip and
reupholster my seats, make me a carpet, and then come out and help me
with the final fit - all for $1200.

Michael

[Marco Leon]

I agree too. The "either-this-or-call-Piper" reality hit me when I was
pricing wheel fairings for my Warrior. Piper wanted around $6,000 for a new
set compared to ~$2,300 from Globe Fiberglass. I was lucky to find a set on
eBay.

Marco Leon




Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

[Mike Spera]

Plasticguy,

I'm currently eating a large crow over this. I did follow up with a more
balanced observation the next day:

"Intellectually, I know that the low volume radically affects the
economics, but it really is hard to get over. When I think back on what
it costs to have an injection mold made... well they ARE really
expensive. Also, given the HUNDREDS of little bits and pieces needed for
all these planes and models, each requiring a different mold. O.K.

I'm over it (I'm still going to repaint the old stuff!!!).

As for automotive plastic, I usually buy aftermarket. Most of it is
pretty good.

Mike"

I humbly apologize over my previous (below) remarks. Plastic has become
such a "common" material that we consumers have come to expect to be
really inexpensive. Sometimes it is hard to separate the material itself
from the finished part.

As part of my rehab, I will place an order with your firm. Honest. Which
company are you with?

Thanks for your understanding,
Mike


plasticguy wrote:

> "Mike Spera" > wrote in message
> ...
> Yes, I already looked at Plane Plastics and
>
>>Vantage. Totally, absolutely, criminally outrageous pricing. Ten buck
>>parts selling for two hundred dollars. Even with the "airplane" surcharge,
>>an entire Piper remake should only cost about $200. There ain't any
>>certification, tracking, insurance, or other "excuse" for these prices.
>
>
> Well Mike, I see we disagree.
> First I take exception to the term PIRATE.
> (but Pirate Plastics would be a cool name )
> I manufacture low volume plastic parts for a living.
> So lets look at a few things.
>
> Tool amortization............I own the tools to make the parts,l they aren't
> cheap.
> Machine amortization......I own the capital equipment to make the parts,
> they aren't cheap
> LABOR.........................I have the skilled people who make the parts.
> People aren't cheap
> Overhead.......................I get to pay all the taxes, utility, rent,
> advertising and ALL the other costs.
> Material cost..................Plastic is "solid oil" it isn't cheap. I've
> seen 2 price increases this year alone
> the first was 21.5% the second was ONLY
> 15%
> PMA compliance costs.... I get to reverse engineer and create a drawing for
> EACH PART, PROVE IT FITS to the local MIDO guys, have it added to my PMA
> supplement, specify the material used, identify the vendor of the material,
> maintain lot tracability, comply with the Fastener Quality Act, cockpit
> flammability standards, VOC emission limits from the EPA and solid waste
> regulatory folks. I get to maintain a Quality Program and have everything in
> order for periodic inspections by the MIDO guys.
>
> THEN I GET TO ADD PROFIT and watch people complain about why stuff costs
> what it does.
>
> Scott.
>
>
>

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

[jls]

"Michael" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> > I will take them out, repair the one or 2 cracks, paint them, and put
> 'em back in.
>
> What you are suggesting will work, but it won't look wonderful.
>
> When I redid the upholstery in my PA-30, I had an automotive upholstery
> guy repair the plastic pieces and cover them over with automotive
> headliner material. This is a soft, plushy, thin fabric that comes
> with an industry standard (ASTM/SAE) fire resistant label, making it
> legal to use in Part 23 aircraft not certificated in the commuter
> category and not used in Part-135 ops (I will gladly email anyone a PDF
> scan of a letter from the FAA to this effect, originally obtained by
> our own Rod Farlee) and it turns what would otherwise look like cheap,
> repaired, painted plastic into something that looks like it came out of
> a midrange Japanese sedan.
>
> I can't tell you exactly what this cost, but it could not have been
> much because it was part of a package that included (labor and
> materials) having the guy cover my plastic as described, repair and
> upholster my aluminum side panels, sew me a headliner, strip and
> reupholster my seats, make me a carpet, and then come out and help me
> with the final fit - all for $1200.
>
> Michael
>

This is too attractive an idea to pass up, since all the plastic parts for
an old Cessna are now awaiting SEM and I don't relish the idea of painting
them using spray cans. Thanks in advance for the PDF and a helpful steer
to the headliner material. I googled Farlee and found an interesting Avweb
article on the legalities of using similar material and of flame resistance.

Here it is: http://www.avweb.com/news/maint/182839-1.html

And another by Bill O'Brien:
http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/news/archive/september/Interior.htm

And some serious reading for homebuilders:
http://www.bitchin-stitchin.com/trimtips.htm

[Jim Burns]

Thanks for the tip Michael. The window surrounds in our Aztec are Piper off
white, I'm wondering about the clean up or wear-ability of the automotive
headliner material. What has your experience been?
Jim

[Michael]

Jim Burns wrote:
> Thanks for the tip Michael. The window surrounds in our Aztec are
Piper off
> white, I'm wondering about the clean up or wear-ability of the
automotive
> headliner material. What has your experience been?

My experience has been that the automotive headliner material wears and
cleans up just fine. I've only had it on my plane for a year, but I've
seen how it does in automobiles.

Michael

[Michael]

> Thanks in advance for the PDF and a helpful steer to the headliner
material.

Actually, it turns out the PDF is part of the article you cited so
there is no need for me to email it:
http://www.avweb.com/newspics/obrien.pdf

As for the headliner material, well, if you are in the Houston area I
can recommend an excellent inexpensive shop.

In general, I think the article you cited is a good one, and it does
show what a disaster our regulatory system is.

The author boils down his conclusions to the following:

1) Effectively for this discussion, as Category 23, Part 91 operations,
we are bound by 23.853(a), (b), (c), and (e); not (d) and (f).

2)We can use any interior materials we wish, as long as they are
"flame-resistant."

3)"Flame-resistant" is defined in FAR 1.

I agree with the above.

4)AC 23-2, Section 4(b) provides guidance concerning acceptable means,
but not the only means, of complying with the FAR 1 definition of
"flame-resistant." These procedures mimic FAR 23 Appendix F Section
(e), the "horizontal test."

This is questionable, and we have an FAA authority stating just the
opposite. Quoting O'Brien from that letter:

"However, since the FAA has not established a test to determine what is
or what is not flame resistant, you will still have to have an
acceptable industry certification stating that the new fabric and
material you are using in your aircraft's interior is flame resistant."

Given that I have this letter, I am going to go with O'Brien. I
believe that doing your own test (or contracting someone else to do it
for you) is neither necessary nor sufficient. The proper approach is
to use a fabric with an industry standard flame resistant
certification. Automotive fabrics meet this standard. Further, they
are made to a standard developed by an industry consensus group, and
thus meet the definition of standard parts.

It's also interesting to note that we do not normally maintain
certificates for standard parts or materials we use in aircraft. If
you patch a small hole in the belly with ceconite and dope (or other
process) for a fabric plane or 2024T3 (alclad or primed) and AD (solid)
or CR (CherryMax mechanical) rivets, you are not required or expected
to maintain a paper trail for the materials you used. You as the
person performing this small, simple repair are responsible for using
the correct materials and techniques, and your signature certifies that
such were used. Note that this repair, like interior work, is
considered preventive maintenance and may be performed by the
pilot-owner (NOT by any random person). So what I am basically telling
you is that if you go to the automotive upholstery supplier, verify
that the bolt he is cutting from has a fire-resistant label referencing
the ATSTM/SAE standard, and then use the fabric in your upholstery work
(having the person of your choice assist), and then make the logbook
entry to this effect, you're legal.

In practice - this has not been an issue since AC 43.13 has been
corrected. At this point pretty much everyone knows burn certs are
not, and never were, required for Part 91 airplanes not used in Part
135 service that are not certificated in the commuter category.

Note that manufacturers like Airtex and aviation specialty interior
shops would really prefer you not know this, and will cast all sorts of
FUD on it, because basically their entire business model depends on
their customers not going to their local automotive upholstery shop,
which will do a better job cheaper.

Michael