Pre-Buy Inspection Begins

[AcroGimp]

So back in the Fall I began exploring a possible purchase of a formerly flying Cassutt IIIM that my EAA Chapter was willed following the unexpected passing of one of our members.

I received word this afternoon that the Cassutt has been lowered from the rafters of one of our hangars and is now on the floor where I can begin my pre-buy.

Stockers like this one are still placing in the Bronze at Reno, are competitive in IAC aerobatics, and place well in the Sport Air Racing League (Sprint Class) - so you can see where I might be going with this if I can make it work....

The Cassutt has a bit of a reputation as a 'hot' ship depending on which wing is installed - this racer appears to have the 15' 'thick airfoil' race wing which is a decent setup apparently - the only real question is ground handling - I have had experienced Cassutt drivers tell me it might not be for me due my amputation (Giles Henderson) and I have had guys tell me it should be OK (Jay Jones of Race 45 "Quadnickel" and Creighton King who now owns the Cassutt line) - so that remains an open question.

Here are some pics from a couple months ago:

I thought the color scheme reminded me of something and finally figured it out....'Grabber Lime' on a '71 429 CJ Mach 1 Mustang, the colors are really very similar in person.

Assuming it passes muster on inspection I plan to repaint it, in the same Grabber Lime Green colors but with more of an homage to the Mach 1 scheme.

'Gimp

 

[Seanaldinho]

Looks like a fun plane.

What motor is in it? Top speed? Roll rate?

 

[AcroGimp]

Looks like a fun plane.

What motor is in it? Top speed? Roll rate?

Should be an O-200 (not confirmed yet).

Top speed with race prop and race prep motor is over 300, as-is probably around 200-220 - plan is to replace existing but questionable race prop with 3-blade sport profile from Craig Catto, shooting for 190-200 @ 3000 RPM and 2,000FPM climb - design has been tested to VNE of 360 IAS (over 400 TAS).

Roll rate is about 400 deg/second, so similar to the Extra 300L I was flying.

Airframe is +/- 12G Limit Loads.

'Gimp

 

[Seanaldinho]

Should be an O-200 (not confirmed yet).

Top speed with race prop and race prep motor is over 300, as-is probably around 200-220 - plan is to replace existing but questionable race prop with 3-blade sport profile from Craig Catto, shooting for 190-200 @ 3000 RPM and 2,000FPM climb - design has been tested to VNE of 360 IAS (over 400 TAS).

Roll rate is about 400 deg/second, so similar to the Extra 300L I was flying.

Airframe is +/- 12G Limit Loads.

'Gimp

Phew, sounds like fun times.

 

[zaitcev]

This is amazing. And I thoght people flying KR-2 were amazing.

 

[AcroGimp]

If this one doesn't pan out for any reason I will try and find another one - I can't think of another plane that offers the performance on 5 GPH - funny thing is I have been in and around sport aviation for 20 years and while knew OF the Cassutt I didn't really know ABOUT it.

Tom Cassutt deserves an Aviation Sainthood, the little plane is simply amazing.

'Gimp

 

[JoseCuervo]

They are amazing planes, and to see one that is race ready is impressive. A good friend had one (RIP) and he had to take his shoes off to fit in the plane. Hauled a lot of hardware home from Reno with that Cassault.

Best of luck on the pre-buy and looks like a lifetime of fun.

 

[Arbiter419]

I love these little old race planes! Keep us posted!

 

[pmanton]

That looks like the EAA Chapter 14 hangar. I was hangared there for a very short time before we found our airpark home. Say hi to Bob Johnson for me.

Paul
Salome, AZ

 

[Henning]

Why does it have Australian registration on the bottom of the wing?

 

[AcroGimp]

Why does it have Australian registration on the bottom of the wing?

Because it was built and originally flown in Australia.

That plus a lack of records will drive an EXP-Exhibition registration among other challenges.

'Gimp

 

[AcroGimp]

That looks like the EAA Chapter 14 hangar. I was hangared there for a very short time before we found our airpark home. Say hi to Bob Johnson for me.

Paul
Salome, AZ

Yes it is Paul. I'll say hi to Bob for you on Saturday.

'Gimp

 

[Henning]

Because it was built and originally flown in Australia.

That plus a lack of records will drive an EXP-Exhibition registration among other challenges.

'Gimp

Do you know who built it?

 

[AcroGimp]

Do you know who built it?

Actually yes. I've exchanged several e-mails with him. Nice guy but he finished it in '78 (2nd Cassutt to fly in Australia) flew it for a couple years then sold it, logs and buildbook went with - and are no longer available.

I have visited with a local DAR and his recommendation was EXP-Exhibition for lowest risk with respect to getting a CofA.

'Gimp

 

[Henning]

Actually yes. I've exchanged several e-mails with him. Nice guy but he finished it in '78 (2nd Cassutt to fly in Australia) flew it for a couple years then sold it, logs and buildbook went with - and are no longer available.

I have visited with a local DAR and his recommendation was EXP-Exhibition for lowest risk with respect to getting a CofA.

'Gimp

Interesting, is the guy in the Melbourne area (Victoria)? I know quite a few of the guys down there. Depending on condition, (how much you need to do to make it right again) you may also be able to get a new certificate and a repairman's certificate for you.

 

[AcroGimp]

So I got to spend a very hurried 5 minutes with the little bird this afternoon on way from office to the house.

Good news is, I fit, basically, sort of.

Easy to step in from the floor (34" inseam), and leg room was not a problem, nor did my prosthetic appear to be an issue. Easy to get on and manipulate the pedals, and heel brakes were easy to get to.

Bit tight on the shoulders at the top canopy frame, but not something that needs to change unless I am suddenly able to add size to my deltoids (no joy after years of working out).

Canopy and head room are problematic. I can close the canopy but the fiberglass crown is riding on my head.

This was with 2" seat cushion and 2" seat back cushion, meaning it might require a new raised turtledeck and canopy unless the seat back can be angled further back to allow better headroom along with room for a chute (IAC rules).

All in all, it really just felt 'right', and the view down that long nose to the prop, pure sexy!

In depth inspection with my A&P buddy begin this weekend, no hurry - will be taking our time, probably remove wing for unfettered access to inspect the suspect left wing skin and glue joints.

'Gimp

 

[AcroGimp]

Spent more time with the Cassutt today.

Confirmed engine is a Rolls O-200 with original ID Plate intact. Is a starter case.

Empty weight is 546, with oil, no fuel. L 262, R 264 (with nearly flat tire), TW 20.

Main gear seems about .420 thick (does that sound right?).

Welds look good, tubing is all good. Firewall took some deformation while hung up but can be fixed.

Got in and out several times. Rollover structure is right on top/back of my shoulders. With thin seat pad and no back pad I have adequate headroom but it is tight. The canopy hinge line stringers are 18 3/4” on the inside which is uncomfortably tight.

Control system is in good condition with minor wallowing in the elevator idler pin ears at the aileron bracket.\

Cowlings are in good condition and fabric seems OK although we are planning to punch test it. There is a fair amount of ringworm in the paint (original auto lacquer paint, ~37 yrs old).

Next steps are borescope jugs through plug hole, hot and cold compression checks, then remove and inspect wing due to previously mentioned repair areas.

Open to any thoughts/observations from the above. I am tempted to try and raise the turtledeck and widen the canopy stringers for more comfort although would certainly mean a delay and additional cost.

'Gimp

 

[Henning]

Is it cotton and dope? I didn't think there was a punch test for Ceconite/poly fabrics.

 

[nddons]

Wow, Gimp. Good luck!

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

Is it cotton and dope? I didn't think there was a punch test for Ceconite/poly fabrics.

The Stitts manual suggests that the punch tests can be used as a preliminary check. My copy is at the airport so I can't quote at the moment.

 

[AcroGimp]

Is it cotton and dope? I didn't think there was a punch test for Ceconite/poly fabrics.

According to builder, PolyFiber. Going back to the AMT Handbook, the Maule tester is not approved (ok since this is an EXP), but it can work and prevents having to cut out a test strip - this is a check my A&P buddy really wants done and I don't disagree. I really don't want to recover if I don't have to.

'Gimp

 

[Jimmy cooper]

I recently sold a taildragger with Ceconite. It had been rebuilt in 96 always hangared. It was in like new condition including the Ceconite, At annual , the AI who is very familiar with fabric aircraft. ( he owns a 150 hp Citabria. ) used a maul tester and when it hit 48 he stopped, saying it was in good shape. There will be many kinds of advise on this and many experts calling for cutting off fabric and pull testing it. If the fabric is tight and the paint looks good. If you look thru the wing inspection holes and do not see daylight or pinholes of light when it's in sunlight, your fine. Always hangared is a biggie as with any airplane. I've owned 6 different ceconite taildraggers. All were tested this way.

 

[AcroGimp]

Made some additional progress on the inspection this weekend. Plane was out in the sun (and rain) on its' own wheels for first time in many years and I have to say, the lines are just fantastic. Photos make it look nicer than it is but give a good sense of overall build.

I removed all four wing-to-body fairings/closeout panels and borescoped the left wing with a friend's borescope, and although my technique is pretty poor I was able to see the ribs and main spar even with the wing, instrument panel and fuel tank installed. Nothing I could see was definitive one way or another but I am uploading some cuts of the video to Youtube and will post a link when able.

I did notice a couple things, one is the ribs are pronounced and visible on the upper wing skin under the light I had yesterday - is this about common?

Jumped in again to verify the tight fit and the fit is indeed tight. The roll over tubes are uncomfortable on the upper back of my shoulders, and the canopy frame is digging into the outside of my shoulders. Might be able to pad the roll over tubes but have decided if I buy this one I will need to widen the canopy frame (and related structure) at the aft end of the canopy.

Last thing is the fuel selector setup, seems a bit cobbled together to me. Since I would be adding a flop tube I am also tempted to replace the plumbing and selector under the tank for something cleaner.

Had a discussion with another chapter and Board member, he too seems to think that engine value should be the offering price.

Anyway, slowly moving forward, thanks for any inputs you care to make.

'Gimp

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

Punch testing - from "How to Cover an Aircraft Using the Poly-Fiber System" as referenced by STC SA1008WE

The IA can use a Maule Fabric Tester as an aid to see if there is UV damage

Warning: AC 43.13-1B states that a Maule Tester is not approved for determining airworthiness; it is only an aid. Also, Maule Testers only give an accurate reading on bare fabric. It does no good to "punch" painted fabric; you are measuring the combined strength of the paint and fabric. To use the Maule, push until it reads 56 pounds; no need to push further and punch a hole in the fabric unless the IA is seeking additional business repairing your unnecessary holes.

If the Maule Tester indicated that the fabric is questionable: do the "Hang it On the Wall" test."...

So, yea, punch a bare spot on your poly-fiber.

 

[AcroGimp]

Punch testing - from "How to Cover an Aircraft Using the Poly-Fiber System" as referenced by STC SA1008WE

So, yea, punch a bare spot on your poly-fiber.

Exactly my thought. There are a couple bare spots where we can punch test for basic condition of the fabric. Real issue whether or not the ringworm in the paint can be repaired (questionable) or if it just suggests a full recover which is an undesireable delay and cost but may be necessary.

'Gimp

 

[DaleB]

Look at it this way... if you strip and recover it, you'll be able to inspect every weld, fastener, tube, rib and inch of that airplane. At the speeds that thing will fly, and given its age, condition and history, it's probably the only way I'd be comfortable leaving the ground in it. But that's just me.

 

[alexgeo]

Looks almost like an Air Tractor

Beautiful plane though! I wish you the best of luck.

 

[Tom-D]

Exactly my thought. There are a couple bare spots where we can punch test for basic condition of the fabric. Real issue whether or not the ringworm in the paint can be repaired (questionable) or if it just suggests a full recover which is an undesireable delay and cost but may be necessary.

'Gimp

one very simple test to see if the paint is still attached to the fabric.

press on some duct tape, pull it off, see how much paint comes with it.

if the paint is not attached, the fabric is no good.

try to rejuvenate if that doesn't work. recover.

 

[jesse]

Oh man, I should not have read this thread....

 

[jesse]

one very simple test to see if the paint is still attached to the fabric.

press on some duct tape, pull it off, see how much paint comes with it.

if the paint is not attached, the fabric is no good.

try to rejuvenate if that doesn't work. recover.

What if the paint comes off but the silver coat still looks perfect? Couldn't it be more of a paint issue and less of a fabric issue in that case?

(I'm no expert with fabric, and my fabric is by no means perfect, but I constantly keep an eye on it, and with a 85 mph airplane I'm a lot less concerned)

 

[Tom-D]

What if the paint comes off but the silver coat still looks perfect? Couldn't it be more of a paint issue and less of a fabric issue in that case?

(I'm no expert with fabric, and my fabric is by no means perfect, but I constantly keep an eye on it, and with a 85 mph airplane I'm a lot less concerned)

Probably surface wasn't properly prepared between the silver and the top coat. typical of most of the Poly Fiber processes. Folks will wipe down with the wrong stuff before applying the color.

 

[Tom-D]

Look at it this way... if you strip and recover it, you'll be able to inspect every weld, fastener, tube, rib and inch of that airplane. At the speeds that thing will fly, and given its age, condition and history, it's probably the only way I'd be comfortable leaving the ground in it. But that's just me.

Do you realize that there are dope and cotton systems that are approaching 40 years old that still pass the test for airworthiness?

 

[Tom-D]

Exactly my thought. There are a couple bare spots where we can punch test for basic condition of the fabric. Real issue whether or not the ringworm in the paint can be repaired (questionable) or if it just suggests a full recover which is an undesireable delay and cost but may be necessary.

'Gimp

What system is on the aircraft? Poly Fiber? (Stitts) Airtech? Stewarts ? dope and cotton????

 

[Tom-D]

pick a nice open bay between two ribs, press your finger into the fabric, did it crack around your finger?

If it did it's time to recover.

 

[DaleB]

Do you realize that there are dope and cotton systems that are approaching 40 years old that still pass the test for airworthiness?

I could not possibly care less. The fabric would be a small percentage of my worry.

If I were in the OP's position of buying and, we would assume, flying an airplane of that type, of that age, with that history, with that much potential for Lord only knows who to have done Lord only knows what to it... and Lord only knows what kind of hidden damage may have been done over the years of moving, disassembly, reassembly, and hanging from a hangar roof... the wheels would not depart the ground until I'd been over every inch of it. Every inch. Maybe some people's risk tolerance is higher; bully for them. Call me chicken, but I'm a live chicken.

 

[Tom-D]

I could not possibly care less. The fabric would be a small percentage of my worry.

If I were in the OP's position of buying and, we would assume, flying an airplane of that type, of that age, with that history, with that much potential for Lord only knows who to have done Lord only knows what to it... and Lord only knows what kind of hidden damage may have been done over the years of moving, disassembly, reassembly, and hanging from a hangar roof... the wheels would not depart the ground until I'd been over every inch of it. Every inch. Maybe some people's risk tolerance is higher; bully for them. Call me chicken, but I'm a live chicken.

Many buyers can find any reasons to not buy, fly or ?.

 

[Henning]

Many buyers can find any reasons to not buy, fly or ?.

It's a tiny plane, recovering shouldn't be a great challenge. My main issue is that it was built in the land of "She be right mate" and I'd like to see how well it was constructed.

 

[Tom-D]

It's a tiny plane, recovering shouldn't be a great challenge. My main issue is that it was built in the land of "She be right mate" and I'd like to see how well it was constructed.

I'd like to see it fly. It's flown safely before, I see a few pictures that show a pink interior, that tells me it has poly Fiber on it. That system is good for almost ever.
I'd be more concerned with getting the fuel system cleaned and the engine running properly.

 

[DaleB]

Many buyers can find any reasons to not buy, fly or ?.

I think "live through the experience" is the term you're looking for there.

To clarify: I'm all in favor of buying (if it's what you want) and once bought it would be bordering on criminal not to fly it. However... call me a wimp if you want, but I've just read far too many NTSB reports about guys buying something like this (especially E/AB), and discovering on the way to the fatal crash site that something was wrong with it that they didn't know about. The case of the one with the aileron bellcrank that broke loose in flight, or the guy who watched from his parachute as the Fly Baby he was flying home after purchase augered in (with a wing fluttering along behind it) come to mind.

In the case of this particular lovely bit of flying history, after what it's been through I wouldn't want to make any large bets on how well it has been treated at every step along the way. Again -- maybe it's just me. If you're confident that you can get to every bit of the airframe to insect for problems before flying it, great. If not... I'd probably be willing to re-cover for the peace of mind that would come along with having gone over it "nekkid".

 

[AcroGimp]

It is PolyFiber with an auto finish.

I have ZERO doubts about basic construction now that I have been spending time with it. In discussions with original builder in Australia I found he had to draw up every part not explicitly drawn on the original plans, EXP was much more stringently regulated by CAA than it has ever been here - this was 2nd Cassutt built in Australia, lots of oversight.

Going to try and cold compression check today, maybe get a gallon of 100LL and fire it up as inspection continues.

More later