Who got the Colorado DG-505?

Just curious if anybody on this forum knows who won the salvage
bidding for the DG-505 that hit a fencepost in Colorado:

http://www.aigaviation.com/aviations...x?faano=N505KK

It's cool if nobody wants to fess up, I'm just curious.

That wing looks like it might be repairable, but it would take some
careful and clever work, and it might take more time than is
economical. I'd imagine you would have to scarf out a couple or three
feet of wing spar each side of the break.

The last I heard, DG wasn't in a position to make a new DG500-series
wing; they have moved on to the DG1000. So if you wanted a new wing it
had to come from their subcontractor AMS.

Thanks, Bob K.

On May 4, 2:32*pm, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
Just curious if anybody on this forum knows who won the salvage
bidding for the DG-505 that hit a fencepost in Colorado:

http://www.aigaviation.com/aviations...l.aspx?faano=N....

It's cool if nobody wants to fess up, I'm just curious.

That wing looks like it might be repairable, but it would take some
careful and clever work, and it might take more time than is
economical. I'd imagine you would have to scarf out a couple or three
feet of wing spar each side of the break.

The last I heard, DG wasn't in a position to make a new DG500-series
wing; they have moved on to the DG1000. So if you wanted a new wing it
had to come from their subcontractor AMS.

Thanks, Bob K.

Trust me, it's not repairable. Even if it was, you would end up
spending years and 30k dollars plus fixing the thing.

On May 4, 3:34*pm, Reed von Gal wrote:

Trust me, it's not repairable. Even if it was, you would end up
spending years and 30k dollars plus fixing the thing.

I've seen some pretty clever repairs on about this magnitude, so I
respectfully disagree. For example, there was the Genesis where JJ
basically created about six feet of wing from scratch. It took him a
winter of on-and-off work, and turned out so nice you could not tell
the wing had been repaired.

Thanks, Bob K.
http://www.hpaircraft.com

On May 4, 4:47*pm, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
On May 4, 3:34*pm, Reed von Gal wrote:

Trust me, it's not repairable. Even if it was, you would end up
spending years and 30k dollars plus fixing the thing.

I've seen some pretty clever repairs on about this magnitude, so I
respectfully disagree. For example, there was the Genesis where JJ
basically created about six feet of wing from scratch. It took him a
winter of on-and-off work, and turned out so nice you could not tell
the wing had been repaired.

Thanks, Bob K.http://www.hpaircraft.com

Fair enough. I guess you don't see those crazy repair jobs that often
due to the fact it is usually cheaper just to write off the airplane.
I have heard that Applebay has done some amazing stuff with wrecked
gliders.

On May 4, 3:47*pm, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
On May 4, 3:34*pm, Reed von Gal wrote:

Trust me, it's not repairable. Even if it was, you would end up
spending years and 30k dollars plus fixing the thing.

I've seen some pretty clever repairs on about this magnitude, so I
respectfully disagree. For example, there was the Genesis where JJ
basically created about six feet of wing from scratch. It took him a
winter of on-and-off work, and turned out so nice you could not tell
the wing had been repaired.

Thanks, Bob K.http://www.hpaircraft.com

Hi Bob,
AIG salvage will (should) tell you who got the DG-500, but they won't
tell you how much the bid was. My Genesis had the last 6 foot of the
left wing severed by a steel fence post. I contacted Marskey (one of
the designers) with my repair scheme and got his OK to proceed. I made
top and bottom templates at root, tip and inboard end of aileron from
the good wing, then set the bottom templates on my level table
arranged to accept the left wing. Laid in the two pieces and checked
for straight L/E & T/E + straight top and bottom. Then I removed the
carbon rods from the top spar cap on what would be a 150:1 scarf ratio
by grinding out each rod, one at a time using a skill-saw with a 8"
abrasive disc. This moved the repair inboard some 6', just before the
location of wet-wing ballast tank. When all rods had been removed, I
prepared the replacement rods by laying in each new rod every 3" which
= 150:1. Things got a little complicated because the original spar
achieved a taper by dropping a rod every few inches. Had to make sure
all the new rods went as far as possible ( root spar cap starts with
100+ 1/8" carbon rods and the tip has 18 rods. The rods are wrapped in
one layer of thin cloth (92110), so we laid a strip of that in before
gooping each rod with epoxy an flox before laying it in its new hope.
Working fast, Pat and I had them all in place in 45 minutes, wrapped
the 92110 over the top, laid in a strip of peal-ply followed by a 2X4
with lead weights on top of it to achieve a compact unit. Next, I
repaired/replaced the spar web and drag spar + as much of the lowes
shin that were accessible which gave the newely re-joined wing pieces
some regidity. When all that could be done from the top was
accomplished, we carefully hoisted the wing up and rotated it upside
down and laid it into the top templates. Then.....................did
all the above again on the lower spar cap! I estimated I had 25K in
the repair (at my normal shop rate $65/hr. When all was finished and
post-cured we proof-loaded both wings to 5.3 G-s.................they
took it without a groan and didn't hardly bend!
A fun and challenging project. I planned on selling it, but got to
liking it too much and with a new wing fairing and a few other tid-
bits, she will climb with most ships..............won't out-climb
anybody, but as delivered the ship wouldn't climb an inch in a 1 to 2
knot thermal. Believe me, I have tried...................she always
did run well, the faster you go, the better she runs!
Cheers,
JJ
PS, Just finished installing a ballistic parachute from BRS. The
Genesis was designed for this system, so the hard points and hatch
were all there.

On May 4, 4:47*pm, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
On May 4, 3:34*pm, Reed von Gal wrote:

Trust me, it's not repairable. Even if it was, you would end up
spending years and 30k dollars plus fixing the thing.

I've seen some pretty clever repairs on about this magnitude, so I
respectfully disagree. For example, there was the Genesis where JJ
basically created about six feet of wing from scratch. It took him a
winter of on-and-off work, and turned out so nice you could not tell
the wing had been repaired.

Thanks, Bob K.http://www.hpaircraft.com

I once knew a BGA senior inspector that rebuilt an absolutely
shattered DG-300 (that he flew into some wires). The repair was at
least this complex. The rebuild weighed within 10oz of the original
weight. That was craftsmanship.

Frank Whiteley

On May 4, 7:53*pm, JJ Sinclair wrote:
On May 4, 3:47*pm, Bob Kuykendall wrote:

On May 4, 3:34*pm, Reed von Gal wrote:

Trust me, it's not repairable. Even if it was, you would end up
spending years and 30k dollars plus fixing the thing.

I've seen some pretty clever repairs on about this magnitude, so I
respectfully disagree. For example, there was the Genesis where JJ
basically created about six feet of wing from scratch. It took him a
winter of on-and-off work, and turned out so nice you could not tell
the wing had been repaired.

Thanks, Bob K.http://www.hpaircraft.com

Hi Bob,
AIG salvage will (should) tell you who got the DG-500, but they won't
tell you how much the bid was. My Genesis had the last 6 foot of the
left wing severed by a steel fence post. I contacted Marskey (one of
the designers) with my repair scheme and got his OK to proceed. I made
top and bottom templates at root, tip and inboard end of aileron from
the good wing, then set the bottom templates on my level table
arranged to accept the left wing. Laid in the two pieces and checked
for straight L/E & T/E + straight top and bottom. Then I removed the
carbon rods from the top spar cap on what would be a 150:1 scarf ratio
by grinding out each rod, one at a time using a skill-saw with a 8"
abrasive disc. This moved the repair inboard some 6', just before the
location of wet-wing ballast tank. When all rods had been removed, I
prepared the replacement rods by laying in each new rod every 3" which
= 150:1. Things got a little complicated because the original spar
achieved a taper by dropping a rod every few inches. Had to make sure
all the new rods went as far as possible ( root spar cap starts with
100+ 1/8" carbon rods and the tip has 18 rods. The rods are wrapped in
one layer of thin cloth (92110), so we laid a strip of that in before
gooping each rod with epoxy an flox before laying it in its new hope.
Working fast, Pat and I had them all in place in 45 minutes, wrapped
the 92110 over the top, laid in a strip of peal-ply followed by a 2X4
with lead weights on top of it to achieve a compact unit. Next, I
repaired/replaced the spar web and drag spar + as much of the lowes
shin that were accessible which gave the newely re-joined wing pieces
some regidity. When all that could be done from the top was
accomplished, we carefully hoisted the wing up and rotated it upside
down and laid it into the top templates. Then.....................did
all the above again on the lower spar cap! *I estimated I had 25K in
the repair (at my normal shop rate $65/hr. When all was finished and
post-cured we proof-loaded both wings to 5.3 G-s.................they
took it without a groan and didn't hardly bend!
A fun and challenging project. I planned on selling it, but got to
liking it too much and with a new wing fairing and a few other tid-
bits, she will climb with most ships..............won't out-climb
anybody, but as delivered the ship wouldn't climb an inch in a 1 to 2
knot thermal. Believe me, I have tried...................she always
did run well, the faster you go, the better she runs!
Cheers,
JJ
PS, Just finished installing a ballistic parachute from BRS. The
Genesis was designed for this system, so the hard points and hatch
were all there.

Wow, awesome.

On Wed, 4 May 2011 15:34:21 -0700 (PDT), Reed von Gal
wrote:


Trust me, it's not repairable. Even if it was, you would end up
spending years and 30k dollars plus fixing the thing.

I've seen a couple of wings that were more damaged than this (LS-8,
spar broken four feet from the root, Nimbus 2C spar broken twice)
which were repaired for a reasonable price (FAR less than the 30.000
you cite).

It might be a problem in the US (where probably only a few DG-505s are
flying), though - usually one takes an undamaged wing and builds
female molds in which the broken wing is fixed. If there's no
undamaged wing available, things get complicated...

Cheers
Andreas

On 5/4/2011 7:56 PM, Frank Whiteley wrote:
On May 4, 4:47 pm, Bob wrote:
On May 4, 3:34 pm, Reed von wrote:

Trust me, it's not repairable. Even if it was, you would end up
spending years and 30k dollars plus fixing the thing.

I've seen some pretty clever repairs on about this magnitude, so I
respectfully disagree. For example, there was the Genesis where JJ
basically created about six feet of wing from scratch. It took him a
winter of on-and-off work, and turned out so nice you could not tell
the wing had been repaired.

Thanks, Bob K.http://www.hpaircraft.com

I once knew a BGA senior inspector that rebuilt an absolutely
shattered DG-300 (that he flew into some wires). The repair was at
least this complex. The rebuild weighed within 10oz of the original
weight. That was craftsmanship.

Frank Whiteley

George Applebay once (chucklingly, once he realized how little I then knew
about composite repairs), said to me, "Oh no, Bob. That's not a major repair.
To us, a major repair might be something like splicing a main spar within 3
feet of the root."

As JJ and others have previously shared, fiberglass-based composites are
conceptually (as distinct from 'craftsmanly') easy to repair, and definitely
simpler if enough of the broken bits remain from which to make (if no unbroken
bits exist from which to pull) female molds in which to create/splice things
back together.

Carbon is not fundamentally more difficult to repair, though arguably more
'persnickety' due to lower strength margins (thanks to its relatively higher
stiffness compared to fiberglass) in the final product, and increased
difficulty visually verifying proper/complete 'wetting-out' of dry hand layups.

Kevlar is in a different league, due (not entirely) to cutting difficulties.

I know of a Nimbus II that was shattered (fatally, unfortunately) on an OFL
attempt, and - unlike Humpty Dumpty - the fuselage (& canopy) was (were)
pieced back together to make a male mold/plug, around which a female mold was
formed, in which a new cockpit area was made, then grafted back onto the
spliced-together tailboom. Major wing repairs were also required. All done by
two guys with previously little fiberglass experience, one of whom later
opened an FAA-approved composite repair station.

If the repairs are properly done, no detectable weight gain due to the repairs
need occur.

As always, the devil is in the details, so...kids, don't try this at home
without professional input.

Bob W.

P.S. Anyone who takes the above as sufficient guidance and knowledge to begin
crafting their own structural composite repairs might want to reflect upon
their place in the gene pool beforehand, so please - no flames on any basis of
the information being incomplete. Of COURSE it is. My major conceptual point
is that when assking the question, "Can [this collection of composite shards]
be repaired?" the answers is almost always, "Yes," when we're talking 'glass
gliders'. Insert the word 'economically' directly ahead of 'repaired' and the
answer become much more complex.

On May 5, 9:30*pm, BobW wrote:
On 5/4/2011 7:56 PM, Frank Whiteley wrote:





On May 4, 4:47 pm, Bob *wrote:
On May 4, 3:34 pm, Reed von *wrote:

Trust me, it's not repairable. Even if it was, you would end up
spending years and 30k dollars plus fixing the thing.

I've seen some pretty clever repairs on about this magnitude, so I
respectfully disagree. For example, there was the Genesis where JJ
basically created about six feet of wing from scratch. It took him a
winter of on-and-off work, and turned out so nice you could not tell
the wing had been repaired.

Thanks, Bob K.http://www.hpaircraft.com

I once knew a BGA senior inspector that rebuilt an absolutely
shattered DG-300 (that he flew into some wires). *The repair was at
least this complex. *The rebuild weighed within 10oz of the original
weight. *That was craftsmanship.

Frank Whiteley

George Applebay once (chucklingly, once he realized how little I then knew
about composite repairs), said to me, "Oh no, Bob. That's not a major repair.
To us, a major repair might be something like splicing a main spar within 3
feet of the root."

As JJ and others have previously shared, fiberglass-based composites are
conceptually (as distinct from 'craftsmanly') easy to repair, and definitely
simpler if enough of the broken bits remain from which to make (if no unbroken
bits exist from which to pull) female molds in which to create/splice things
back together.

Carbon is not fundamentally more difficult to repair, though arguably more
'persnickety' due to lower strength margins (thanks to its relatively higher
stiffness compared to fiberglass) in the final product, and increased
difficulty visually verifying proper/complete 'wetting-out' of dry hand layups.

Kevlar is in a different league, due (not entirely) to cutting difficulties.

I know of a Nimbus II that was shattered (fatally, unfortunately) on an OFL
attempt, and - unlike Humpty Dumpty - the fuselage (& canopy) was (were)
pieced back together to make a male mold/plug, around which a female mold was
formed, in which a new cockpit area was made, then grafted back onto the
spliced-together tailboom. Major wing repairs were also required. All done by
two guys with previously little fiberglass experience, one of whom later
opened an FAA-approved composite repair station.

If the repairs are properly done, no detectable weight gain due to the repairs
need occur.

As always, the devil is in the details, so...kids, don't try this at home
without professional input.

Bob W.

P.S. Anyone who takes the above as sufficient guidance and knowledge to begin
crafting their own structural composite repairs might want to reflect upon
their place in the gene pool beforehand, so please - no flames on any basis of
the information being incomplete. Of COURSE it is. My major conceptual point
is that when assking the question, "Can [this collection of composite shards]
be repaired?" the answers is almost always, "Yes," when we're talking 'glass
gliders'. Insert the word 'economically' directly ahead of 'repaired' and the
answer become much more complex.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The sticky part(no pun intended) is that it must be repaired in
accordance with the manufacturer's instructions which may or may not
be available. Note in JJ's description above that he worked closely
with the designer in engineering his repair.
And , contrary to Bob's comment, carbon struictures are more complex
and critical to repair than "simple" glass structures.
FWIW
UH