Hangar Design

[Kyle Boatright]

Our EAA chapter is perpetually scheming for ways to acquire a hangar for
member aircraft and for chapter activities. Obviously, any reasonably sized
hangar requires a substantial outlay of funds. The cost issue seems to be
the big hold-up right now.

Anyway, we're looking at a variety of pre-engineered metal building options
for a 50x60 (approx) hangar, but would consider a "homebuilt" alternative if
we could come up with a design that would be functional (it would need to
meet code and have decent aesthetics), more affordable than commercially
purchased alternatives, and that could be built by your typical group of
enthusiasts.

Thoughts? Suggestions?

By the way, the hangar would be at a public airport, and we've been directed
by the airport authority that Quonset hut type shelters or bigger versions
of portable garage type buildings will not get their approval. I suspect
that what they really want us to build is a commercially purchased hangar,
but until they rule out other alternatives, we're gonna pursue all viable
options.

[Lou]

Well, there may be a different way, but I can tell you that as a
carpenter
I estimated building my own hanger instead of ordering one. The cost
difference
was minimal. The part that was a money saver was the hanger door.
Instead
of paying the big money for a folding door, I came up (on paper) with
a panel
system very similiar to the glass doors you see at malls that fold up
into a pocket.
The doors would be made of plywood and each one would have a barrel to
set into
the concrete floor. In other words, you will probebly be better off
with a commercial
building.
Lou

[Kyle Boatright]

"Lou" > wrote in message
ps.com...
> Well, there may be a different way, but I can tell you that as a
> carpenter
> I estimated building my own hanger instead of ordering one. The cost
> difference
> was minimal. The part that was a money saver was the hanger door.
> Instead
> of paying the big money for a folding door, I came up (on paper) with
> a panel
> system very similiar to the glass doors you see at malls that fold up
> into a pocket.
> The doors would be made of plywood and each one would have a barrel to
> set into
> the concrete floor. In other words, you will probebly be better off
> with a commercial
> building.
> Lou

I tend to agree - a metal box on a concrete floor is a pretty basic and
inexpensive structure, when you consider that it gives you something that
should be windproof, waterproof, and should hold up well for a long time if
basic maintenance is done. On the other hand, there is always the chance
that someone has figured out a hangar design is labor intensive but not
capital intensive. That might work for us. So I'm compelled to ask.

KB

[Michelle P]

Kyle Boatright wrote:
> Our EAA chapter is perpetually scheming for ways to acquire a hangar for
> member aircraft and for chapter activities. Obviously, any reasonably sized
> hangar requires a substantial outlay of funds. The cost issue seems to be
> the big hold-up right now.
>
> Anyway, we're looking at a variety of pre-engineered metal building options
> for a 50x60 (approx) hangar, but would consider a "homebuilt" alternative if
> we could come up with a design that would be functional (it would need to
> meet code and have decent aesthetics), more affordable than commercially
> purchased alternatives, and that could be built by your typical group of
> enthusiasts.
>
> Thoughts? Suggestions?
>
> By the way, the hangar would be at a public airport, and we've been directed
> by the airport authority that Quonset hut type shelters or bigger versions
> of portable garage type buildings will not get their approval. I suspect
> that what they really want us to build is a commercially purchased hangar,
> but until they rule out other alternatives, we're gonna pursue all viable
> options.
>
>
Kyle,
50X60 steel building will cost around $50,000 for the building. Erecting
it would be around $30,000.

check out R&M steel. http://www.rmsteel.com/

We have two of there building and will have a third soon.

Michelle

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Kyle Boatright"> wrote

> On the other hand, there is always the chance that someone has figured out
> a hangar design is labor intensive but not capital intensive. That might
> work for us. So I'm compelled to ask.

Something way different, seen in these links...

Benifits are strong resistance to wind and earthquake, and different enough
that you will generate some community interest.

<http://www.domtec.com/process.html>

<http://www.greenhomebuilding.com/manufactured_systems.htm>

<http://www.ysmforbuilding.com/domecrete1.htm>
--
Jim in NC

[Montblack]

("Morgans" wrote)
> Benifits are strong resistance to wind and earthquake, and different
> enough that you will generate some community interest.

<http://www.domtec.com/process.html>

<http://www.greenhomebuilding.com/manufactured_systems.htm>

<http://www.ysmforbuilding.com/domecrete1.htm>


Well, that's two and a half hours of sleep I won't be getting tonight.

Thanks a lot Jim in NC!!!!


Montblack
Must stop reading....
Must sleep....!

[[email protected]]

KyleOn May 9, 7:14�pm, "Kyle Boatright" >
wrote:
> Our EAA chapter is perpetually scheming for ways to acquire a hangar for
> member aircraft and for chapter activities. *Obviously, any reasonably sized
> hangar requires a substantial outlay of funds. The cost issue seems to be
> the big hold-up right now.
>
> Anyway, we're looking at a variety of pre-engineered metal building options
> for a 50x60 (approx) hangar, but would consider a "homebuilt" alternative if
> we could come up with a design that would be functional (it would need to
> meet code and have decent aesthetics), more affordable than commercially
> purchased alternatives, and that could be built by your typical group of
> enthusiasts.
>
> Thoughts? Suggestions?
>
> By the way, the hangar would be at a public airport, and we've been directed
> by the airport authority that Quonset hut type shelters or bigger versions
> of portable garage type buildings will not get their approval. *I suspect
> that what they really want us to build is a commercially purchased hangar,
> but until they rule out other alternatives, we're gonna pursue all viable
> options.

Kyle -

Our chapter (www.eaa32.org) went through the same drama several years
ago. While we were debating the budget vs. construction type issue,
one of our members got a lead on an existing 40' X 100' metal building
that was scheduled to be torn down for new highway construction. In
fact, it had been the State DOT's field office for the project, and
was on land owned by a local hotel chain. Being organized as a 501(c)3
not-for-profit corporation that made it possible for them to donate
the building to us and take a tax right off.

When we got the green light from the hotel firm, we put out the call
for all able bodied members to come out to disassemble the building,
and stuff the salvagable material into some rented trailers, and
hauled them up to our county airport location. One member fortunately
had access to a mobil crane which was needed to disassemble the metal
frame and load onto a flatbed. Incredibly, we accomplished all this in
less than three weeks with a bunch of part-timers. At this point
everyone thought we were almost (in our) home. Reality set in when we
discovered that before ground breaking, we had to:
1. Negotiate a favorable long term lease for the land with the county.
2. Hire a professional engineering firm to design a new foundation.
3. Make new plans for the interior.
4. Buy a fold-up door (included engineering modification to building
frame)
5. Get plans approved by eight agencies, including FEMA because it is
located in a flood plain.

Because we decided to rebuild it ourselves, it took about two years to
go through the above, and then about four years of Saturdays to get to
where we could lock the door (like a homebuilt, we can't say it's
really complete, but it's usable). Most of the building process is
documented on our website under "ARC" which officially stands for
Aviation Resource Center, but some wags opine that being in a flood
plain suggests something else. One important caveat as part of the
negotiation with the airport is that the ARC was not to be used of
long term storage of airplanes. This turned out not to be an issue b/c
we basically need all the available space for meetings and short term
aircraft use at critical completion points.

We learned a lot, many of us had to readjust our saturdays after the
construction was complete, and in spite of the occasional ruffled
feather, I would say that most found it an enjoyable experience. And,
after years of yakking about it, we finally have a home.

If any chapter wants to do anything like what I've described here, I
will be glad to pass on our experience in the form of what to do, or
not do, as the case may be based on our experience. BTW, if you can't
find a friendly building donor, there are some buiding component
companies around I can steer you to to get the lowest starting cost if
you want to do it with "sweat equity" like we did. We ended up going
to them for many components because some stuff just wasn't reusable.

Doug Killebrew
Construction Manager, EAA 32, (Ret)

[Dick[_1_]]

To second item #1 below..
An insufficiently long enough term lease bit our chapter badly at a city
airport. Even though totally financing/constructing our
shop/hanger/building, after 25 years we "lost" it to the city. Our rent went
from $0 to almost $300/ month. Be aware that city airport commissions can
change easily from GA/experimental friendly to not. We lost every
discussion over the last 4 years and now spend most of our time chasing
revenue to cover our expenses....As I understand, the land was leased for 20
years at no rent and our building became theirs afterwards for us to rent
like other hangers on the field. ie: no "break" to EAA chapter.
> wrote in message
ups.com...
KyleOn May 9, 7:14?pm, "Kyle Boatright" >
wrote:
> Our EAA chapter is perpetually scheming for ways to acquire a hangar for
> member aircraft and for chapter activities. Obviously, any reasonably
> sized
> hangar requires a substantial outlay of funds. The cost issue seems to be
> the big hold-up right now.
>
> Anyway, we're looking at a variety of pre-engineered metal building
> options
> for a 50x60 (approx) hangar, but would consider a "homebuilt" alternative
> if
> we could come up with a design that would be functional (it would need to
> meet code and have decent aesthetics), more affordable than commercially
> purchased alternatives, and that could be built by your typical group of
> enthusiasts.
>
> Thoughts? Suggestions?
>
> By the way, the hangar would be at a public airport, and we've been
> directed
> by the airport authority that Quonset hut type shelters or bigger versions
> of portable garage type buildings will not get their approval. I suspect
> that what they really want us to build is a commercially purchased hangar,
> but until they rule out other alternatives, we're gonna pursue all viable
> options.

Kyle -

Our chapter (www.eaa32.org) went through the same drama several years
ago. While we were debating the budget vs. construction type issue,
one of our members got a lead on an existing 40' X 100' metal building
that was scheduled to be torn down for new highway construction. In
fact, it had been the State DOT's field office for the project, and
was on land owned by a local hotel chain. Being organized as a 501(c)3
not-for-profit corporation that made it possible for them to donate
the building to us and take a tax right off.

When we got the green light from the hotel firm, we put out the call
for all able bodied members to come out to disassemble the building,
and stuff the salvagable material into some rented trailers, and
hauled them up to our county airport location. One member fortunately
had access to a mobil crane which was needed to disassemble the metal
frame and load onto a flatbed. Incredibly, we accomplished all this in
less than three weeks with a bunch of part-timers. At this point
everyone thought we were almost (in our) home. Reality set in when we
discovered that before ground breaking, we had to:
1. Negotiate a favorable long term lease for the land with the county.
2. Hire a professional engineering firm to design a new foundation.
3. Make new plans for the interior.
4. Buy a fold-up door (included engineering modification to building
frame)
5. Get plans approved by eight agencies, including FEMA because it is
located in a flood plain.

Because we decided to rebuild it ourselves, it took about two years to
go through the above, and then about four years of Saturdays to get to
where we could lock the door (like a homebuilt, we can't say it's
really complete, but it's usable). Most of the building process is
documented on our website under "ARC" which officially stands for
Aviation Resource Center, but some wags opine that being in a flood
plain suggests something else. One important caveat as part of the
negotiation with the airport is that the ARC was not to be used of
long term storage of airplanes. This turned out not to be an issue b/c
we basically need all the available space for meetings and short term
aircraft use at critical completion points.

We learned a lot, many of us had to readjust our saturdays after the
construction was complete, and in spite of the occasional ruffled
feather, I would say that most found it an enjoyable experience. And,
after years of yakking about it, we finally have a home.

If any chapter wants to do anything like what I've described here, I
will be glad to pass on our experience in the form of what to do, or
not do, as the case may be based on our experience. BTW, if you can't
find a friendly building donor, there are some buiding component
companies around I can steer you to to get the lowest starting cost if
you want to do it with "sweat equity" like we did. We ended up going
to them for many components because some stuff just wasn't reusable.

Doug Killebrew
Construction Manager, EAA 32, (Ret)

[Denny]

The biggest hurdle that do it yourselfers <I have that tendency> will
face is that most airport authorities will insist upon a stamped
engineering report designating snow load, wind rating, earthquake
rating, and fire rating..
That pretty much eliminates any homebuilt wood hangars, etc..
My current business venture requires a clear span 60 x 125 foot
building with 30 X 16 door openings at each end... Burning the
midnight oil heavily and getting multiple quotes on everything from
wood truss <and I even calculated out for a stick building done by
myself with undocumented workers> to slip formed concrete, it came
down to a steel building as the most economical...


denny

[Al G[_2_]]

"Michelle P" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Kyle Boatright wrote:
>> Our EAA chapter is perpetually scheming for ways to acquire a hangar for
>> member aircraft and for chapter activities. Obviously, any reasonably
>> sized hangar requires a substantial outlay of funds. The cost issue seems
>> to be the big hold-up right now.
>>
>> Anyway, we're looking at a variety of pre-engineered metal building
>> options for a 50x60 (approx) hangar, but would consider a "homebuilt"
>> alternative if we could come up with a design that would be functional
>> (it would need to meet code and have decent aesthetics), more affordable
>> than commercially purchased alternatives, and that could be built by your
>> typical group of enthusiasts.
>>
>> Thoughts? Suggestions?
>>
>> By the way, the hangar would be at a public airport, and we've been
>> directed by the airport authority that Quonset hut type shelters or
>> bigger versions of portable garage type buildings will not get their
>> approval. I suspect that what they really want us to build is a
>> commercially purchased hangar, but until they rule out other
>> alternatives, we're gonna pursue all viable options.
>>
>>
> Kyle,
> 50X60 steel building will cost around $50,000 for the building. Erecting
> it would be around $30,000.
>
> check out R&M steel. http://www.rmsteel.com/
>
> We have two of there building and will have a third soon.
>
> Michelle

I'm helping a local EAA partnership put one of these up in RBG. It is an
80' X 80' and the receipt was for $47,500, delivered(I think we are getting
the door from someone else). It is going together like a big erector set,
and things fit very well. I've built pole barns before, and this is a piece
of cake.

Al G

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Montblack" > wrote
>
> Well, that's two and a half hours of sleep I won't be getting tonight.
>
> Thanks a lot Jim in NC!!!!

<chuckle> So glad I could help! <g>

There really is some interesting stuff, in those pages. The real trick is
finding someone in the area that does that kind of construction. If I was
younger, and still in commercial construction, I think I would look into
building these domes.

I was not able to find the exact page that I was looking for. I remember
seeing a hangar that was a concrete dome, and had two doors, that were the
same shape as the dome. They would stay in a down position, but rotate
along the inside wall, thus taking up very little space.

These buildings are the most wind resistant of any building shape ever
tested. They can easily withstand a level 3 hurricane, and possibly more.
--
Jim in NC

[Kyle Boatright]

Our situation should be a "no lose" arrangement. The airport leases the
land to you for 10 years at a nominal rate. 5 years into the lease, they
can adjust the rate to reflect market changes. After 10 years, the airport
can either buy your hangar at market value or can extend your lease. While
it would be bad to lose a hangar after 10 years, at least we wouldn't walk
away empty handed...

KB


"Dick" > wrote in message
news:7%C0i.5703$wy2.595@trnddc03...
> To second item #1 below..
> An insufficiently long enough term lease bit our chapter badly at a city
> airport. Even though totally financing/constructing our
> shop/hanger/building, after 25 years we "lost" it to the city. Our rent
> went from $0 to almost $300/ month. Be aware that city airport commissions
> can change easily from GA/experimental friendly to not. We lost every
> discussion over the last 4 years and now spend most of our time chasing
> revenue to cover our expenses....As I understand, the land was leased for
> 20 years at no rent and our building became theirs afterwards for us to
> rent like other hangers on the field. ie: no "break" to EAA chapter.
> > wrote in message
> ups.com...
> KyleOn May 9, 7:14?pm, "Kyle Boatright" >
> wrote:
>> Our EAA chapter is perpetually scheming for ways to acquire a hangar for
>> member aircraft and for chapter activities. Obviously, any reasonably
>> sized
>> hangar requires a substantial outlay of funds. The cost issue seems to be
>> the big hold-up right now.
>>
>> Anyway, we're looking at a variety of pre-engineered metal building
>> options
>> for a 50x60 (approx) hangar, but would consider a "homebuilt" alternative
>> if
>> we could come up with a design that would be functional (it would need to
>> meet code and have decent aesthetics), more affordable than commercially
>> purchased alternatives, and that could be built by your typical group of
>> enthusiasts.
>>
>> Thoughts? Suggestions?
>>
>> By the way, the hangar would be at a public airport, and we've been
>> directed
>> by the airport authority that Quonset hut type shelters or bigger
>> versions
>> of portable garage type buildings will not get their approval. I suspect
>> that what they really want us to build is a commercially purchased
>> hangar,
>> but until they rule out other alternatives, we're gonna pursue all viable
>> options.
>
> Kyle -
>
> Our chapter (www.eaa32.org) went through the same drama several years
> ago. While we were debating the budget vs. construction type issue,
> one of our members got a lead on an existing 40' X 100' metal building
> that was scheduled to be torn down for new highway construction. In
> fact, it had been the State DOT's field office for the project, and
> was on land owned by a local hotel chain. Being organized as a 501(c)3
> not-for-profit corporation that made it possible for them to donate
> the building to us and take a tax right off.
>
> When we got the green light from the hotel firm, we put out the call
> for all able bodied members to come out to disassemble the building,
> and stuff the salvagable material into some rented trailers, and
> hauled them up to our county airport location. One member fortunately
> had access to a mobil crane which was needed to disassemble the metal
> frame and load onto a flatbed. Incredibly, we accomplished all this in
> less than three weeks with a bunch of part-timers. At this point
> everyone thought we were almost (in our) home. Reality set in when we
> discovered that before ground breaking, we had to:
> 1. Negotiate a favorable long term lease for the land with the county.
> 2. Hire a professional engineering firm to design a new foundation.
> 3. Make new plans for the interior.
> 4. Buy a fold-up door (included engineering modification to building
> frame)
> 5. Get plans approved by eight agencies, including FEMA because it is
> located in a flood plain.
>
> Because we decided to rebuild it ourselves, it took about two years to
> go through the above, and then about four years of Saturdays to get to
> where we could lock the door (like a homebuilt, we can't say it's
> really complete, but it's usable). Most of the building process is
> documented on our website under "ARC" which officially stands for
> Aviation Resource Center, but some wags opine that being in a flood
> plain suggests something else. One important caveat as part of the
> negotiation with the airport is that the ARC was not to be used of
> long term storage of airplanes. This turned out not to be an issue b/c
> we basically need all the available space for meetings and short term
> aircraft use at critical completion points.
>
> We learned a lot, many of us had to readjust our saturdays after the
> construction was complete, and in spite of the occasional ruffled
> feather, I would say that most found it an enjoyable experience. And,
> after years of yakking about it, we finally have a home.
>
> If any chapter wants to do anything like what I've described here, I
> will be glad to pass on our experience in the form of what to do, or
> not do, as the case may be based on our experience. BTW, if you can't
> find a friendly building donor, there are some buiding component
> companies around I can steer you to to get the lowest starting cost if
> you want to do it with "sweat equity" like we did. We ended up going
> to them for many components because some stuff just wasn't reusable.
>
> Doug Killebrew
> Construction Manager, EAA 32, (Ret)
>
>

[Peter Dohm]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Montblack" > wrote
> >
> > Well, that's two and a half hours of sleep I won't be getting tonight.
> >
> > Thanks a lot Jim in NC!!!!
>
> <chuckle> So glad I could help! <g>
>
> There really is some interesting stuff, in those pages. The real trick is
> finding someone in the area that does that kind of construction. If I was
> younger, and still in commercial construction, I think I would look into
> building these domes.
>
> I was not able to find the exact page that I was looking for. I remember
> seeing a hangar that was a concrete dome, and had two doors, that were the
> same shape as the dome. They would stay in a down position, but rotate
> along the inside wall, thus taking up very little space.
>
> These buildings are the most wind resistant of any building shape ever
> tested. They can easily withstand a level 3 hurricane, and possibly more.
> --
> Jim in NC
>
>
I recall it being mentioned a while back. This might be the one:
http://www.monolithic.com/gallery/commercial/hangar_door/index.html

Peter

[Montblack]

("Morgans" wrote)
> I was not able to find the exact page that I was looking for. I remember
> seeing a hangar that was a concrete dome, and had two doors, that were the
> same shape as the dome. They would stay in a down position, but rotate
> along the inside wall, thus taking up very little space.


Here you go Jim.

If you're a fast reader ....it shouldn't take you too long. <g>

<http://www.monolithic.com/gallery/commercial/hangar_door/index.html>

<http://www.monolithic.com/gallery/commercial/mclad/index.html>

<http://www.monolithic.com/gallery/commercial/hangars03/index.html>

<http://www.monolithic.com/gallery/commercial/hangars/index.html>


<http://www.monolithic.com/construction/index.html>
Much much much fun info in these links, too.


Montblack

[Bill Daniels]

Domes are simply cool.

I remember a proposal for a dome/carosel hangar that stored 8 aircraft. The
aircraft were on a snowflake-like carosel made of 6" steel "C" channel that
also guided the aircraft wheels as they were rolled in tail first. It
rolled on the concrete floor with dozens of ball bearing urethane tired
wheels and rotated about the center of the hangar.

An owner would punch in his combination into the lock and the door would
electrically open as the carosel rotated his aircraft into position to roll
out of the hangar. It would have worked something like an airplane vending
machine.

The claim was made that this was significantly cheaper than T-hangers with
the same ease of access to the airplanes. Cheaper because there was only
one small door for 8 airplanes.

Bill Daniels


"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> ("Morgans" wrote)
>> I was not able to find the exact page that I was looking for. I remember
>> seeing a hangar that was a concrete dome, and had two doors, that were
>> the same shape as the dome. They would stay in a down position, but
>> rotate along the inside wall, thus taking up very little space.
>
>
> Here you go Jim.
>
> If you're a fast reader ....it shouldn't take you too long. <g>
>
> <http://www.monolithic.com/gallery/commercial/hangar_door/index.html>
>
> <http://www.monolithic.com/gallery/commercial/mclad/index.html>
>
> <http://www.monolithic.com/gallery/commercial/hangars03/index.html>
>
> <http://www.monolithic.com/gallery/commercial/hangars/index.html>
>
>
> <http://www.monolithic.com/construction/index.html>
> Much much much fun info in these links, too.
>
>
> Montblack
>

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Bill Daniels" < wrote

> Domes are simply cool.

> I remember a proposal for a dome/carosel hangar that stored 8 aircraft.
> The aircraft were on a snowflake-like carosel made of 6" steel "C" channel
> that also guided the aircraft wheels as they were rolled in tail first.
> It rolled on the concrete floor with dozens of ball bearing urethane tired
> wheels and rotated about the center of the hangar.
>
> An owner would punch in his combination into the lock and the door would
> electrically open as the carosel rotated his aircraft into position to
> roll out of the hangar. It would have worked something like an airplane
> vending machine.
>
> The claim was made that this was significantly cheaper than T-hangers with
> the same ease of access to the airplanes. Cheaper because there was only
> one small door for 8 airplanes.

I can see that there could be a real economy of scale, in an arrangement
like that.

Since a dome large enough to hold 8 airplanes would be rather tall, it would
seem like a second story would not be a large problem, either. It could
become a great space for an EAA chapter to hold meetings, and have offices,
and of course, rest rooms, since a rotating floor would not allow for that,
unless they were built at the very center. A building of some type at the
center would be a definite possibility, with the grid rotating around the
central structure.

I wonder how much such an arrangement would cost? Just a cost for the shell
and a concrete floor would be interesting to know.
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Bill Daniels" < wrote

> The claim was made that this was significantly cheaper than T-hangers with
> the same ease of access to the airplanes. Cheaper because there was only
> one small door for 8 airplanes.

It would also tend to lend itself to situations where there is a limited
area for a taxiway, or access to the ramp. Less taxiway surface area to the
entrance would be another reason to expect some cost savings.

OK, I'm sold. Who is in for setting up a limited partnership for designing
and building hangars like this all over the country? <g>

The strange thing is, I'm about half serious. Humm.
--
Jim in NC

[Bill Daniels]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Bill Daniels" < wrote
>
>> Domes are simply cool.
>
>> I remember a proposal for a dome/carosel hangar that stored 8 aircraft.
>> The aircraft were on a snowflake-like carosel made of 6" steel "C"
>> channel that also guided the aircraft wheels as they were rolled in tail
>> first. It rolled on the concrete floor with dozens of ball bearing
>> urethane tired wheels and rotated about the center of the hangar.
>>
>> An owner would punch in his combination into the lock and the door would
>> electrically open as the carosel rotated his aircraft into position to
>> roll out of the hangar. It would have worked something like an airplane
>> vending machine.
>>
>> The claim was made that this was significantly cheaper than T-hangers
>> with the same ease of access to the airplanes. Cheaper because there
>> was only one small door for 8 airplanes.
>
> I can see that there could be a real economy of scale, in an arrangement
> like that.
>
> Since a dome large enough to hold 8 airplanes would be rather tall, it
> would seem like a second story would not be a large problem, either.

Monolithic domes need not be spheres - they can be oblate spheroids
therefore not as tall. A 2nd story could really be nice though.

> It could become a great space for an EAA chapter to hold meetings, and
> have offices, and of course, rest rooms, since a rotating floor would not
> allow for that, unless they were built at the very center. A building of
> some type at the center would be a definite possibility, with the grid
> rotating around the central structure.

Actually, the floor doesn't rotate, just a spider frame made of 6" channels.
An additional suggestion was made to make each airplane position slightly
uphill so the airplane would roll out of the hangar powered by gravity. An
electric winch attached to the tail tiedown point would pull it back in -
and allow it to slowly roll out.
>
> I wonder how much such an arrangement would cost? Just a cost for the
> shell and a concrete floor would be interesting to know.
> --
Call one of the dome vendors for an estimate.


Bill Daniels

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Bill Daniels" <wrote

> Monolithic domes need not be spheres - they can be oblate spheroids
> therefore not as tall.

True, but to give strength to the roof, (the curve is needed) in a large
enough building to house 8 airplanes, it will still be high enough to put a
second story in, I would think. The truss type floor could be supported by
the walls of the dome and a load bearing structure in the middle.
Otherwise, the truss would have to be wicked strong, and that means tall.

> Actually, the floor doesn't rotate, just a spider frame made of 6"
> channels.

Right, but there can not be any permenant structures in the arc of the
moving channels, or the channels could not move past them.

There could be a structure in the middle, with the frames rotating around
it, much like a "merry-go-round."
--
Jim in NC

[Neal Pfeiffer]

There is a nice carousel hangar in Moriarty, NM for long-winged gliders.

http://www.silentwingsairshows.com/carousel/

It looks like a normal hangar form the outside, but cuts down on the
typical hangar rash where planes have to be moved around to get the one
you want out. This system allows a single person to get just the
aircraft that is desired.

Kyle Boatright wrote:
> Our EAA chapter is perpetually scheming for ways to acquire a hangar for
> member aircraft and for chapter activities. Obviously, any reasonably sized
> hangar requires a substantial outlay of funds. The cost issue seems to be
> the big hold-up right now.
>
> Anyway, we're looking at a variety of pre-engineered metal building options
> for a 50x60 (approx) hangar, but would consider a "homebuilt" alternative if
> we could come up with a design that would be functional (it would need to
> meet code and have decent aesthetics), more affordable than commercially
> purchased alternatives, and that could be built by your typical group of
> enthusiasts.
>
> Thoughts? Suggestions?
>
> By the way, the hangar would be at a public airport, and we've been directed
> by the airport authority that Quonset hut type shelters or bigger versions
> of portable garage type buildings will not get their approval. I suspect
> that what they really want us to build is a commercially purchased hangar,
> but until they rule out other alternatives, we're gonna pursue all viable
> options.
>
>