Super Viking

M

Mr Mark

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Sep 11, 2019
Messages
2
Display Name
Display name:
Mjc
Hey guys ,I'm looking at a bellanca super Viking to buy and the fuselage has cracks in the paint,, the mechanic has put clear tape on it,,how can I fix this?
 
It really depends on what type of paint you have, and what fabric system was used to cover the fuselage. Hopefully the details are recorded in the logbooks. Owning a few Bellancas myself I can tell you this is very common. Years ago many of the top coats did not have the necessary flex agents in the paint and thus cracks would inevitably occur over time. In most cases you will need to strip the paint down to the silver and in doing so it is very hard to do spot repairs that look good. Based on the picture you posted this is going to be a big job. There is a lot of discussion about this issue on the Vikingpilots.com forum - you might sign-up as this is a good resource for all things Viking related. If you haven't bought the plane yet, get a good pre-buy done by one of the expert Viking shops - there are many potential issues that are a lot more serious and costly to deal with beyond cracks in the paint. Where are you and what's the tail number?
 
Last edited:
Cracks in the finish let in stuff that attacks the fabric itself. UV, ozone, oxygen, airborne pollutants. The polyester fabric weakens at cracks, and sometimes they need sizeable patches to repair. Enough cracks and you might as well re-cover the whole airplane. I would bet that there are a lot of Vikings out there with their original 40-year-old fabric on them.
Cracking fabric over the wood wing would be even worse.

Clear tape won't keep the UV out, either.

As Rob58 says, there are a lot of things on a Viking to consider. A good prebuy is in order to save you money.
 
Clip4 said:
Don’t buy a Viking. You are asking for headaches.
Click to expand...

Ignore this negative nancy. He didn't even answer your question.

The clear tape is a good temporary solution. I have a bird strike on the starboard side empennage. I have duct tape on the inside and clear shipping tape on the outside. I would go to a good fabric and paint specialist for a consultation. I can give you a recommendation for a guy in Placerville.

If you want to get a viking, i highly recommend the viking pilot's forum. It's full of knowledgable viking owners and a&p's who specialize on the brand. do you have pictures of the paint issue?

actually, coincidentally, there's a similar post of a friend of mine having this very issue on his viking and is asking the type of brand preferred for covering up cracks in the paint. his is original 1969 paint. i've flowin in his bird and, while it's not the prettiest plane out there, it is more than airworthy.

here's a link to the post: https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?ur...7&share_tid=6637&share_fid=14489&share_type=t
 
The Viking Pilots forum is a good resource, though the Facebook group is starting to get some more traction in terms of getting good answers quickly (the forum isn't super active).
 
Clip4 said:
Don’t buy any plane that has not been cared-for. You are asking for headaches.
Click to expand...

Fixed that for you.

BSVs, well-maintained, are outstanding aircraft. BSVs, ill-maintained, are not good - just like every other airplane in the fleet.

I used to be leery of the wood wings - but when you understand the structural characteristics of wood, as I do now, you know that it is a superior material, because there is no repetitive-stress weakening.
 
Given the cost to recover the airplane (and, depending on your area, the difficulty of getting any paint shop to work on dope and fabric), I'd pass on the airplane. Lots of other BSVs out there for good prices that won't have all those issues. Once the dope starts to crack, it's really, really difficult to permanently fix. Most patch jobs will just result in the cracks reappearing in the not terribly distant future (ask me how I know). A full recover and repaint costs more than the market value of most BSVs.
 
SCCutler said:
I used to be leery of the wood wings - but when you understand the structural characteristics of wood, as I do now, you know that it is a superior material, because there is no repetitive-stress weakening.
Click to expand...

It's not the fatigue that's the problem with the wood. It's the decay. Moisture from rain, fog, snow, or mice starts the decay process. If that wing root isn't sealed up as per the maintenance manual, water will get in. If the fabric has cracks, it'll get through those too. There's an AD on those wings to check for decay, and it takes time and effort to do, every year: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulator...6256E0D005039CC?OpenDocument&Highlight=17-30a
 
SCCutler said:
Fixed that for you.

BSVs, well-maintained, are outstanding aircraft. BSVs, ill-maintained, are not good - just like every other airplane in the fleet.

I used to be leery of the wood wings - but when you understand the structural characteristics of wood, as I do now, you know that it is a superior material, because there is no repetitive-stress weakening.
Click to expand...

Change it back. Vikings are not good aircraft regardless of how well they were cared for.
 
Clip4 said:
Change it back. Vikings are not good aircraft regardless of how well they were cared for.
Click to expand...

Clearly, opinions vary.

I did not buy one because it did not meet my needs, but I have a not inconsiderable amount of time flying one, and rather enjoy it. In addition, I have plenty of experience with MX on a BSV, and with diligent and timely MX, no big deal.

Once you’ve been strapped into the tight’n’fuzzy interior, the flight experience for the PIC is excellent, and it’s great in rough air.
 
Clip4 said:
No, I have never been dumb enough to buy one. They weren’t a desirable airplane 40 years ago.
Click to expand...

Ok, good to know. It's important for people like the OP to know that so they know how much weight to give your opinion (zero). Funny how people can have such strong opinions about an aircraft they've never owned.
 
Clip4 said:
No, I have never been dumb enough to buy one. They weren’t a desirable airplane 40 years ago.
Click to expand...

I have owned tons of different airplanes and I love the Super Viking... I don't believe you at all know what you are talking about...
I guess you only fly spam cans.
I fly cool stuff like Cubs, Stearmans, Pitts, Christen Eagles etc etc... I guess all my stuff it junk to because it is tube and fabric?
When I sell my high end Bonanza I will probably pick up a Viking because they are cool planes.
 
Great, you own a bunch of fun airplanes that are tube and fabric. Every airplane design has its advantages and disadvantages. The SV is an airplane who’s day came and went a very long time ago.
 
Clip4 said:
Great, you own a bunch of fun airplanes that are tube and fabric. Every airplane design has its advantages and disadvantages. The SV is an airplane who’s day came and went a very long time ago.
Click to expand...

I'm just curious now: why, exactly, do you think the BSV is a bad airplane? Can you give specific examples?
 
Clip4 said:
Great, you own a bunch of fun airplanes that are tube and fabric. Every airplane design has its advantages and disadvantages. The SV is an airplane who’s day came and went a very long time ago.
Click to expand...

Most of our airplanes time has come and gone. We mostly fly metal airplanes held together by rivets, with air-cooled engines using magnetos and we manually control our fuel air ratios and most of our airframes and engines are based on designs from the 1950's.

Are the Super Vikings that different? No. They represent pretty much the pinnacle of their design philosophy and there is always room in my life for elegant designs.
 
Pugs said:
Most of our airplanes time has come and gone. We mostly fly metal airplanes held together by rivets, with air-cooled engines using magnetos and we manually control our fuel air ratios and most of our airframes and engines are based on designs from the 1950's.

Are the Super Vikings that different? No. They represent pretty much the pinnacle of their design philosophy and there is always room in my life for elegant designs.
Click to expand...

Have to disagree, Tube and fabric airplanes have a lot of usefulness today from acro to backcountry, but a retractable fear XC place with fabric, wood spares, steel tubing, a strut on the horizontal stabilizer are not one of them.
 
I used to think the Viking was a neat airplane, until I had to work on one. I used to think the Lake Amphib was neat until I had to work on one. Thought the 210 was neat until...

What it comes down to is this: There Are No Perfect Airplanes. None. All of them have their drawbacks, all of them are nothing more than a bunch of compromises that work. The guys that have owned these things mostly think they were great airplanes, and that's their experience, not mine, and since I have never owned one of them or paid for its maintenance, I can have no valid opinion on how great or rotten they are. All I can say is that working on them can be expensive and time-consuming, and sometimes really awkward. As a pilot-mechanic I would prefer an airplane that is relatively simple, has good access to systems for maintenance, and isn't bothered much by rougher strips: the 180/185, Maule, and so on. Other people like to visit cities far away, and the SV or 210 are good for that.

Fabric doesn't last as long as aluminum, but if enough of the aluminum skin gets badly corroded, the airplane is junk. If hail gets at the airplane violently enough, it's not worth much anymore. Fabric can be replaced and the airplane looks like new again. And it's light. Steel tube frame lasts a long time.

One thing is certain: There are no cheap old airplanes.
 
Dan Thomas said:
All I can say is that working on them can be expensive and time-consuming, and sometimes really awkward.
Click to expand...

I'm curious about your experience in this regard. I find our Viking no more complicated or expensive to maintain than any other complex single engine airplane. Like all airplanes, it's got a few quirks and a few hard to access spots, but on the whole I find it quite easy to work on (and I do a lot of owner-assisted mx).
 
Clip4 said:
Great, you own a bunch of fun airplanes that are tube and fabric. Every airplane design has its advantages and disadvantages. The SV is an airplane who’s day came and went a very long time ago.
Click to expand...

Show me another plane with the Super Viking performance for the money... There is not one.
Nice Vikings can be bought at $30,000 all day long
 
bradg33 said:
I'm curious about your experience in this regard. I find our Viking no more complicated or expensive to maintain than any other complex single engine airplane. Like all airplanes, it's got a few quirks and a few hard to access spots, but on the whole I find it quite easy to work on (and I do a lot of owner-assisted mx).
Click to expand...
Getting at anything behind the panel can be a hassle even with the glareshield removed. In the wing I found massive mouse nests in the bay just outboard of the gear wells, and the access was so limited it took me more than two hours to get them out. Had to fool with various vacuum cleaner hoses and tubes and so on to reach all the corners packed with debris. And I had to use a mirror to even see the stuff. The Viking doesn't have nearly enough access holes in that wing, which is probably why the previous mechanics missed it. It was old debris, see. Visually inspecting sections of the spars is almost impossible.

The Viking wasn't nearly as awkward as the Lake. Tailcone access is almost nil. Takes a LONG time to remove the interior and floorboards to inspect the hull frames and control systems which, I suppose, is why we found so much needing repair and lubrication. Too many mechancis tick stuff off without looking at it.

Edit: And the engine work on the Lake requires that you make some scaffolding of some sort--boards and ladders--to access it, especially around the aft side.

My experience is largely with Cessnas, which have evolved over the years to provide better access. The high wing leaves a flat floor, which is dandy for working under the panel. Except the 150, of course which has its gear box in the way. Low-wing airplanes are a real pain that way, even my wooden Jodel.
 
Last edited:
pigpenracing said:
Show me another plane with the Super Viking performance for the money... There is not one.
Nice Vikings can be bought at $30,000 all day long
Click to expand...

The price for a SV represents demand, which you just pointed out is very low. There is a reason for that.
 
Last edited:
Clip4 said:
Change it back. Vikings are not good aircraft regardless of how well they were cared for.
Click to expand...

Clip4 said:
No, I have never been dumb enough to buy one. They weren’t a desirable airplane 40 years ago.
Click to expand...

Not sure if you’re trolling or just being an a$$ today.

People acquire toys and hobbies that appeal to them personally. Be it niche airplanes, cars, or Caterpillar D4 dozers.
 
kgruber said:
One will overlook the warts of a Viking when flying that magnificent airplane.

It is, by far, the nicest handling passenger light SE aircraft. Top of the list!!!
Click to expand...

This!
 
I have never flown nor had a ride in a Viking, but I know a few that have owned them and they absolutely loved them. Sure would be nice to see one at Rough River next spring.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
 
kgruber said:
One will overlook the warts of a Viking when flying that magnificent airplane.

It is, by far, the nicest handling passenger light SE aircraft. Top of the list!!!
Click to expand...

Absolutely correct. I’ve had my 1989 Viking for 7 years, and I love it. A very sweet flying plane and a magic carpet that lets me and my family travel to places quickly and efficiently.

What I don’t understand is the need that some people have to bad mouth the plane, particularly if they’ve never owned one. I’m pretty sure that they likely have never even flown in one. My point of view is that planes in general are pretty neat, and each type has its pros and cons. What do the naysayers hope to gain? Seems like a lot of hate in particular for the Viking. Not sure why...




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Well, to the questioner. I had the SV for years and loved every minute.
She and I worked the office 6 days a week, 52 weeks a year. Sundays the SV took us to Chicago, or Cleveland, or Cincinnati, or St. Louis, to go to the museums and try the restaurants and still be back at work Monday morning.
Then GC Airlines, aka Gramma Char's child mover, needed to start hauling grandchildren across three states every decent summer weekend/holiday so the cousins in 3 states would have memories of growing up together. This was across two of the Great Lakes. Didn't seem prudent to do single engine.
So the SV went to a new home and an Apache followed me home. That was twenty years ago. The grandchildren are grown and providing their own weekend/holiday transportation. The Apache, however, continues to follow me around. The joker in this tale is that with two engines, and twice the probability for engine failure,I never had so much as a fouled plug in the 15+ years GC Airlines operated. Fat Albert the Apache is nothing if not reliable when maintained properly. :)
 
Clip4 said:
The price for a SV represents demand, which you just pointed out is very low. There is a reason for that.
Click to expand...

That’s why I like them.. I wouldn’t want a Viking for $100,000..
I just bought a Cessna 175 that is in like new condition... Why? First I like being different... Second 80% of folks are scared of the GO-300 because idiots do not operate them correctly.
That means I get a really good performing airplane at a really low price :)
 
Bellanca (Alexandria MN) hired me in the dead of winter sometime around '75 to come back and design antennas for inside the wood wings. Southern California boy damn near FROZE to death even in the heated hangar, but we got the job done. Don't know if they ever produced one with brass tubes inside the wings for antennas. Anybody have one?

Thanks,

Jim
 
I just went to find my logbook, I now have 1846 hours on my Viking!
I bought it in 1999 from Mr. Miller at Plainview, Texas for $52,000. Since then, my wife and I have had it to Toronto (Ontario, Canada), Mexico, Florida, Vancouver (BC, Canada) and many states in between. I have taken it skiing many times, to the beach, to Gaston's (grass), gravel strips, several high DA situations, the mountains of Stanley, Idaho across 100miles of water. I got my commercial and instrument in it. I have been through some ugly clouds with it, took a little ice at Pine Bluff, AR once. I can't tell you how many times I have been in horrible winds with her. 40kts direct xwind is her (well probably my) limit. You can kick out of the crab that has the runway approaching through the side window while you track straight down final, thanks to that generous rudder! Once coming out of Ruidoso, NM there was a wild west Texas wind starting about Carlsbad and it was blowing the desert dust over 10K; my wife still remembers "I lost sight of the wingtip on my side it was so dusty!" It has a pretty decent carrying capacity. I had 4 people in it to Angel Fire, NM (8000'msl).
Really, the airplane has done so much for me I cannot help but be grateful to this incredible machine!
Right now it is my 'work plane', I use it for a regular run I have usually because 'the sportscar'
<--- is down for something ('yet another thing, lol') while I know I can always always hop in 'old reliable' and get the job done. It just keeps on going!

Maintenance; I did 99% of my own mx. Of that work which I did, 70% was engine and 25% landing gear. Ie typical of GA airplanes
When I bought it, the belly fabric needed R&R so I re-did that. I have painted the wings and they still look good. The only wood I did was that the fuel tank covers came loose (they were originally put in with wood screws and these work loose, then the cover starts to shift and you will see paint cracks along the periphery) -very common and there is a great fix that several shops know about and can do now. I did one myself and will do the other shortly. There are some ADs like all aircraft, ensure these are done during the prebuy. The prebuy should be done by a shop that handles BSVs on a regular basis if you are new to the type; there are 3 or 4 of these shops right now.

Here is what those who have significant experience with BSV's will tell you about buying one:
1. Buy Good Wood
2. Keep the Seal Intact
3. Keep it hangared
4. Blow 160kt air through the structure on a regular basis!
If you do those things, you will likely never have a significant wood concern.
* To #1 I will add 'good fabric'. #2 means the paint & fabric, the rubber seals, the caulking around the fairings and covers. #3 I am not sure I would keep one within 25mi of a large body of water but that applies to metal airplanes too. If you have good fabric and paint and keep it hangared, the longevity of that part is indefinite.
I also must add #5..

#5 Buy one and have a blast with it! Ignore the internet nitwits who constantly show up in these threads (typically with little actual awareness of a type) to unfairly malign it. Go to the VikingChat forum and ask actual, current owners your questions.
Oh, I used to fret about the bogus info anti-Vike people spewed, but let's give those nicompoops some credit for their misinformation about the Viking; they keep the prices low so you can get an incredible deal on some great flying!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top