Composite & Carbon Fiber

[NW_PILOT]

Hello, everyone a friend of mine own's Fiberglass and Carbon Fiber molding
business (He makes hoods, doors, fenders & tubs for cars). I was wondering
if anyone has ever used a Cessna 150, 172 or 182 fuselage as a template for
the making of a Carbon Fiber fuselage?

I have few questions! Since it will not be a kit what kind of info would
have to be provided to the FAA to be able to get such a thing approved for a
homebuilt experimental aircraft project?


Thanks In Advance

[jls]

"NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
...
> Hello, everyone a friend of mine own's Fiberglass and Carbon Fiber molding
> business (He makes hoods, doors, fenders & tubs for cars). I was wondering
> if anyone has ever used a Cessna 150, 172 or 182 fuselage as a template
for
> the making of a Carbon Fiber fuselage?

Well, yeah, you could use it as a plug but who would want to?
>
> I have few questions! Since it will not be a kit what kind of info would
> have to be provided to the FAA to be able to get such a thing approved for
a
> homebuilt experimental aircraft project?
>
>
> Thanks In Advance

Have at it. No approval necessary except when you apply for your homebuilt
c of a. It's not like you're getting it certified. Make sure you use a
good set of 150 (or 172) l. g. including nosewheel strut because that stuff
is damn strong.

[W P Dixon]

Well I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong, but if you plan on
using the base airframe of a certified plane already , instead of building
your framework from skratch, which is how I read your post.... You will need
to get approval from the FAA . As a general rule on a certified aircraft
only certified parts may be used. Now if you build the entire plane from the
ground up as an experimental like the man said "HAVE A BALL!"
" jls" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Hello, everyone a friend of mine own's Fiberglass and Carbon Fiber
molding
> > business (He makes hoods, doors, fenders & tubs for cars). I was
wondering
> > if anyone has ever used a Cessna 150, 172 or 182 fuselage as a template
> for
> > the making of a Carbon Fiber fuselage?
>
> Well, yeah, you could use it as a plug but who would want to?
> >
> > I have few questions! Since it will not be a kit what kind of info would
> > have to be provided to the FAA to be able to get such a thing approved
for
> a
> > homebuilt experimental aircraft project?
> >
> >
> > Thanks In Advance
>
> Have at it. No approval necessary except when you apply for your
homebuilt
> c of a. It's not like you're getting it certified. Make sure you use a
> good set of 150 (or 172) l. g. including nosewheel strut because that
stuff
> is damn strong.
>
>

[Morgans]

I don't normally top post, but there is such a mess, here....

Com'on guys! Think his through. Big problems.

# 1 problem. If you make a copy of a 150, don't you think Cessna is going
to have something to say to you, via a lawyer? I do. The 150 is their
design. You can't just copy it!

#2 problem. I quote: "if you plan on using the base airframe of a certified
plane already , instead of building your framework from skratch, which is
how I read your post.... "

What? This isn't a 52 Ford. You don't use the frame, and put a shell on
it. You can't take away the frame, and still use it. The body is the
frame. If you take it away, you ARE starting from "skratch".

Why would you want to copy a 150? Boxy, ugly, no provisions for mounting to
stuff, probably, no angels and tapers from popping it out of the mold. The
problems are too numerous to mention them all.
--
Jim in NC


"W P Dixon" > wrote in message
...
> Well I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong, but if you plan on
> using the base airframe of a certified plane already , instead of building
> your framework from skratch, which is how I read your post.... You will
need
> to get approval from the FAA . As a general rule on a certified aircraft
> only certified parts may be used. Now if you build the entire plane from
the
> ground up as an experimental like the man said "HAVE A BALL!"
> " jls" > wrote in message
> . ..
> >
> > "NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Hello, everyone a friend of mine own's Fiberglass and Carbon Fiber
> molding
> > > business (He makes hoods, doors, fenders & tubs for cars). I was
> wondering
> > > if anyone has ever used a Cessna 150, 172 or 182 fuselage as a
template
> > for
> > > the making of a Carbon Fiber fuselage?
> >
> > Well, yeah, you could use it as a plug but who would want to?
> > >
> > > I have few questions! Since it will not be a kit what kind of info
would
> > > have to be provided to the FAA to be able to get such a thing approved
> for
> > a
> > > homebuilt experimental aircraft project?
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks In Advance
> >
> > Have at it. No approval necessary except when you apply for your
> homebuilt
> > c of a. It's not like you're getting it certified. Make sure you use
a
> > good set of 150 (or 172) l. g. including nosewheel strut because that
> stuff
> > is damn strong.
> >
> >
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.766 / Virus Database: 513 - Release Date: 9/17/2004

[NW_PILOT]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
> I don't normally top post, but there is such a mess, here....
>
> Com'on guys! Think his through. Big problems.
>
> # 1 problem. If you make a copy of a 150, don't you think Cessna is going
> to have something to say to you, via a lawyer? I do. The 150 is their
> design. You can't just copy it!

I did not say copy it I said use the fuselage as a template of course it
would be changed a bit from the original design for 1 it would be composit
not aluminum and the models I listed were an example. I see people are
making piper supercub's dose piper have a problem with it?

>
> #2 problem. I quote: "if you plan on using the base airframe of a
certified
> plane already , instead of building your framework from skratch, which is
> how I read your post....
>
> What? This isn't a 52 Ford. You don't use the frame, and put a shell on
> it. You can't take away the frame, and still use it. The body is the
> frame. If you take it away, you ARE starting from "skratch".
>
> Why would you want to copy a 150? Boxy, ugly, no provisions for mounting
to
> stuff, probably, no angels and tapers from popping it out of the mold.
The
> problems are too numerous to mention them all.

I just used them airplane model #'s for an example this is all hypothetical
at the moment just an idea that my friend brought up to me thought I'd see
what you all thought. All I can say is this guy makes some nice custom car
body's/tubs and ahs a nice shop and offering to do it for cost of materials.

> --
> Jim in NC
>
>
> "W P Dixon" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Well I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong, but if you plan on
> > using the base airframe of a certified plane already , instead of
building
> > your framework from skratch, which is how I read your post.... You will
> need
> > to get approval from the FAA . As a general rule on a certified aircraft
> > only certified parts may be used. Now if you build the entire plane from
> the
> > ground up as an experimental like the man said "HAVE A BALL!"
> > " jls" > wrote in message
> > . ..
> > >
> > > "NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > Hello, everyone a friend of mine own's Fiberglass and Carbon Fiber
> > molding
> > > > business (He makes hoods, doors, fenders & tubs for cars). I was
> > wondering
> > > > if anyone has ever used a Cessna 150, 172 or 182 fuselage as a
> template
> > > for
> > > > the making of a Carbon Fiber fuselage?
> > >
> > > Well, yeah, you could use it as a plug but who would want to?
> > > >
> > > > I have few questions! Since it will not be a kit what kind of info
> would
> > > > have to be provided to the FAA to be able to get such a thing
approved
> > for
> > > a
> > > > homebuilt experimental aircraft project?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks In Advance
> > >
> > > Have at it. No approval necessary except when you apply for your
> > homebuilt
> > > c of a. It's not like you're getting it certified. Make sure you
use
> a
> > > good set of 150 (or 172) l. g. including nosewheel strut because that
> > stuff
> > > is damn strong.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.766 / Virus Database: 513 - Release Date: 9/17/2004
>
>

[NW_PILOT]

" jls" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Hello, everyone a friend of mine own's Fiberglass and Carbon Fiber
molding
> > business (He makes hoods, doors, fenders & tubs for cars). I was
wondering
> > if anyone has ever used a Cessna 150, 172 or 182 fuselage as a template
> for
> > the making of a Carbon Fiber fuselage?
>
> Well, yeah, you could use it as a plug but who would want to?
> >
> > I have few questions! Since it will not be a kit what kind of info would
> > have to be provided to the FAA to be able to get such a thing approved
for
> a
> > homebuilt experimental aircraft project?
> >
> >
> > Thanks In Advance
>
> Have at it. No approval necessary except when you apply for your
homebuilt
> c of a.

What would paperwork would be required for homebuilt c of a, drawings?
Estimated or projected proformance data?


It's not like you're getting it certified. Make sure you use a
> good set of 150 (or 172) l. g. including nosewheel strut because that
stuff
> is damn strong.
>
>

[Morgans]

"NW_PILOT" > wrote
>
> I did not say copy it I said use the fuselage as a template

Still their intellectual property.

of course it
> would be changed a bit from the original design for 1 it would be composit
> not aluminum and the models I listed were an example. I see people are
> making piper supercub's dose piper have a problem with it?


Are they still making Piper Cubs, and trying to sell them?


> > #2 problem. I quote: "if you plan on using the base airframe of a
> certified
> > plane already , instead of building your framework from skratch, which
is
> > how I read your post....
> >
> > What? This isn't a 52 Ford. You don't use the frame, and put a shell
on
> > it. You can't take away the frame, and still use it. The body is the
> > frame. If you take it away, you ARE starting from "skratch".
> >
> > Why would you want to copy a 150? Boxy, ugly, no provisions for
mounting
> to
> > stuff, probably, no angels and tapers from popping it out of the mold.
> The
> > problems are too numerous to mention them all.
>
> I just used them airplane model #'s for an example this is all
hypothetical
> at the moment just an idea that my friend brought up to me thought I'd see
> what you all thought. All I can say is this guy makes some nice custom car
> body's/tubs and ahs a nice shop and offering to do it for cost of
materials.

There would be so much re-engineering that would have to be done, it would
not be the same airplane, except the shape. By the time you did all that,
why not come up with your own shape that takes advantage of the curves that
aluminum can not do? The loads that an airplane has to take would make a
simple copy, like car body tubs unsafe to fly. I'll bet that it would weigh
more in fiberglass if you did strenghten it enough.
--
Jim in NC



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.766 / Virus Database: 513 - Release Date: 9/17/2004

[W P Dixon]

Jim,
I believe I read the post wrong I was under the impression that he
intended to use an N# airplane basic airframe and just redo all the skins
and panels in carbonfiber. You may re skin a plane, remake all the metal
panels you want by processes to the manual of that plane and it will still
be the same N#'d airplane. But yes changing the airframe or starting all
over would make it experimental and Cessna might just "have a problem" with
a copy of their design. To get around that slight changes can be made and
you should be ok as far as a copyright. Seems he wants to make a carbon spin
off of the Cessna, and I agree with you I think it would outweigh the
original. i really would see no point in doing it. probably alot better
designs out there for that type aircraft.
"NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
...
>
> " jls" > wrote in message
> . ..
> >
> > "NW_PILOT" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Hello, everyone a friend of mine own's Fiberglass and Carbon Fiber
> molding
> > > business (He makes hoods, doors, fenders & tubs for cars). I was
> wondering
> > > if anyone has ever used a Cessna 150, 172 or 182 fuselage as a
template
> > for
> > > the making of a Carbon Fiber fuselage?
> >
> > Well, yeah, you could use it as a plug but who would want to?
> > >
> > > I have few questions! Since it will not be a kit what kind of info
would
> > > have to be provided to the FAA to be able to get such a thing approved
> for
> > a
> > > homebuilt experimental aircraft project?
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks In Advance
> >
> > Have at it. No approval necessary except when you apply for your
> homebuilt
> > c of a.
>
> What would paperwork would be required for homebuilt c of a, drawings?
> Estimated or projected proformance data?
>
>
> It's not like you're getting it certified. Make sure you use a
> > good set of 150 (or 172) l. g. including nosewheel strut because that
> stuff
> > is damn strong.
> >
> >
>
>

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 23:25:58 -0400, "Morgans" >
wrote:

>"NW_PILOT" > wrote
>>
>> I did not say copy it I said use the fuselage as a template
>
>Still their intellectual property.
>
>of course it
>> would be changed a bit from the original design for 1 it would be composit
>> not aluminum and the models I listed were an example. I see people are
>> making piper supercub's dose piper have a problem with it?
>
>Are they still making Piper Cubs, and trying to sell them?

Piper restarted Super Cub production in the late '80s...and, AFAIK, never
interfered with the Wag-Aero line other than to demand they quit using the
"Cuby" name. I doubt Boeing will sue Titan aircraft over their Mustang
replica.

I don't think Cessna will care if someone uses a Cessna fuselage as a mold
to built a one-of homebuilt. I think they'll *definitely* care if someone
enters production, claiming the plane is a replica 150....though Fisher
makes just such a claim for one of their planes. But the Fisher product
obviously isn't really look that much like a Cessna.

Keep in mind that a fiberglass mold of a Cessna fuselage would not, in
itself, be an airworthy structure. Any more than the Cessna would be
airworthy if the fuselage structure consisted of nothing more than the
external skin. That fiberglass shell will need the appropriate internal
structure. Bulkheads, etc., plus the hard points for wing, engine, tail,
and gear attachment.

Ron Wanttaja

[Ron Natalie]

"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message ...
> Keep in mind that a fiberglass mold of a Cessna fuselage would not, in
> itself, be an airworthy structure.

Further, the question is, why would you want one anyhow. If you're going to all
the effort to make a composite shell, why would you pattern it after a 40+ year old
profile designed to be cheaply buildable in aluminum?

[Bob Kuykendall]

Some semi-random notes and observations on this topic from someone who
has messed about some with composite tooling:

* The C-150 is a pretty poor basis for such a project. If you do get
to the end of it, you'll have - a copy of a Cessna 150. If you're
going to go to the trouble, you might as well make something special
or at least different. If what you want is a 150, just take the cash
and go buy one. It will cost about half or a quarter of what it would
cost to replicate it in composites.

* Some pretty smart people designed the Cessna 150 for low-cost,
high-volume manufacturing in light sheet metal. If they had started
with the idea of a composite airplane, they would have been at liberty
(as you are now) to accommodate more compound curves and many other
improvements for lower drag and better performance of one kind or
another.

* Making a mold off of any riveted aluminum structure can be a
heinous, hateful experience. The seams and universal-head rivets won't
want to separate, and when they do you've got a mold with a bunch of
dimples and seams. So you end up spending hours and days refinishing
the molds.

* A while back, a couple guys made molds off of a BD-5 fuselage, and
then made carbon fiber shells from the molds. It was a neat project,
but I don't think any airplanes came from it, and last I heard of it I
think the whole project was for sale.

* The trouble it would take to smooth out a 150 fuselage enough to get
a nice mold off of it would probably be better invested in making a
new fuselage plug from scratch using plywood, lath, foam, and bondo.

* If you want to save some trouble, buy transparencies (windshield,
canopy, etc) for some other aircraft and incorporate them into your
plug. That way you know the plastic parts will be available and
relatively inexpensive, and it will save you the trouble of making
transparency tooling and having custom transparencies made.

* In the history of general aviation, there have been several
instances of someone using someone else's fuselage or wing or cowling
or whatever without permission as a direct pattern for their molds. I
don't know of any of them that became legal intellectual property
issues. However, it has almost always ended in tears for the
plagiarist. That history alone makes me believe no little bit in
karma.

* You have to show the FAA very little if anything in the way of
substantive data about the thing you've built. About all you have to
do is convince them that the major portion of the thing was made for
education and recreation, and that its operating limitations are
clearly marked. Ron W. can tell you a lot more about that than I can.

Thanks, and best regards to all

Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com/hp-24

[Roger Halstead]

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 16:14:20 -0700, "NW_PILOT" >
wrote:

>Hello, everyone a friend of mine own's Fiberglass and Carbon Fiber molding
>business (He makes hoods, doors, fenders & tubs for cars). I was wondering
>if anyone has ever used a Cessna 150, 172 or 182 fuselage as a template for
>the making of a Carbon Fiber fuselage?
>
>I have few questions! Since it will not be a kit what kind of info would
>have to be provided to the FAA to be able to get such a thing approved for a
>homebuilt experimental aircraft project?

Only enough to satisfy the 51%, or local examiner.

We had a Lake at HTL that used a Corvette engine. He had to change
enough of the structure that the FAA was happy. It sat up there for
years, but disappeared a couple years back. He did fly it, but I
don't think it met his expectations.

The point being, if you make enough changes it can become a home built
even though it started out as a certified airplane.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>
>
>Thanks In Advance
>
>
>