psm(at)ATT.NET
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 5:15 pm Post subject: Anodized Aluminum and other exotic technologies. |
 |
|
The latest thread has me feeling old and stodgy, but let me share
some thoughts on this general theme anyway.
The technology level in all of Chris Heintz's designs was developed
around 1940 or so. While the designs are newer than that and there
is some innovation in the actual designs, the technology itself is
not at all new. Rather, it is a well established way to build
reliable airplanes. It isn't the newest version of aviation building
technology - that goes to composite construction which is only about
30 years old rather than some 60 years for all-metal
construction. OK, my dates are only guesses and somebody can
probably prove me wrong by a decade or two, but my point is this is
very well established technology.
The finish approaches in this technology seem to include polishing
and painting along with just leaving the aluminum bare and dull (not
a bad choice, in my opinion). The notion that we should consider a
brand new approach to finishing our aluminum seems, somehow, out of
place for such a well established technology. If it were a good
idea, then somebody would have thought of it many years ago and tried
it. Even for a bad idea, somebody probably tried it years ago anyway
and discovered it was a bad idea.
I was attracted to the Zodiac because it is a very conventional
design. It has the engine in the front, the tail in the back and the
wings in the middle. It is "Modern" in that it offers tricycle
landing gear - another 1940's breakthrough. All of this leaves me
with a high degree of confidence that the plane will fly and endure
the elements longer than my old body will.
For those who must try something completely new, there are plenty of
composite designs with the engine in the back and the tail in the
front and an unusual number of wings. The simple fact that these
designs are not conventional brings to mind the likelihood that they
don't work as well as the old tried and true approach. If they were
really better, then they would have become the conventional design
approach. This might indeed be true for some variants of composite
construction that are finding their way into commercial airplanes
including airliners, but I am still convinced that the simplicity of
all metal construction is the best choice for me.
I intend to paint the rest of my plane using the same epoxy primer
and acrylic top coat I have already used on the bottom of the
fuselage. For those who want to try something as radical as
anodizing, I say - "Have a Ball". However, I hope they have good
life insurance when they fly their radical new twist on a technology
that was stable before they were born.
Paul
XL fuselage
Do not archive
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
|
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
