SIG T-Clips repair
11-20-2016, 07:23 PM
#1
Thread Starter
SIG T-Clips repair
I found out the hard way that the T-Clips does not recover like a Something Extra. Was goofing around with high AOA but didn't give myself enough altitude. Stalled the wing and it dropped off to the right and spun in.
This was a couple months ago and needed to let it air out since it is powered by an FG-11 gas engine and the fuel tank blew apart on impact. Today while waiting on the glue to dry on the top sheet of my B-25 wing I pulled it down and started tearing into it. Got the fuse side cut, and fitted, need to cut some parts forward of the F2 section, and thinking I should use lite ply since the stuff I have is a bit stiff and heavy, so 2 layers of it would be a bit much. Had to epoxy two pieces of 3/16 ply together to equal the thickness of the firewall, so letting that cure for a day before cutting the new FW.
Since the cowl was ripped and the canopy is also a hatch, I will order replacements, so only going to rebuild the fuse. Wings survived, only the tube was bent.
This was a couple months ago and needed to let it air out since it is powered by an FG-11 gas engine and the fuel tank blew apart on impact. Today while waiting on the glue to dry on the top sheet of my B-25 wing I pulled it down and started tearing into it. Got the fuse side cut, and fitted, need to cut some parts forward of the F2 section, and thinking I should use lite ply since the stuff I have is a bit stiff and heavy, so 2 layers of it would be a bit much. Had to epoxy two pieces of 3/16 ply together to equal the thickness of the firewall, so letting that cure for a day before cutting the new FW.
Since the cowl was ripped and the canopy is also a hatch, I will order replacements, so only going to rebuild the fuse. Wings survived, only the tube was bent.
11-21-2016, 03:39 AM
#2
Ouch! Looks like quite a winter project.
11-21-2016, 06:04 AM
#3
Thread Starter
Actually this will be a quick one to repair. It looks worse than it is. Since the only way to get the windscreen is to get the entire hatch, that will make it easier. I just hope it doesn't come out heavier in the nose than it was, have to put the battery towards the rear to balance it, and don't want to add more weight. The battery broke loose so have to open the tail up again. 
11-27-2016, 08:53 AM
#4
Thread Starter
Almost done with the repairs, and can cover it soon. Just have to finish F2 and the top of the fuse between the firewall and F2, then it can be covered. Undecided on if I want to put the FG-11 back in or look for a 65 or so Saito for it. It needs more power but it was nose heavy to start with and will be even more so now that I repaired it with heavier ply. Lack of power is partially why it went in, if it had more power I might have been able to get enough lift to pull out. I do know it lacks good vertical, my LT-40 can out climb it.
This makes no sense, these pics only show up rotated here, not on my computer, even the thumbs are correct.
This makes no sense, these pics only show up rotated here, not on my computer, even the thumbs are correct.
11-27-2016, 03:16 PM
#5
Thread Starter
Repairs completed, just waiting on the replacement cowl and windshield and decals. Not going to do anything with the firewall until I decide on a replacement engine.
And of course it came up sideways again.
And of course it came up sideways again.
12-29-2016, 09:39 AM
#10
Thread Starter
Cowl, hatch and decals on their way so the Clip's will be airworthy once more. Now to decide if I want to put the FG-11 back in it, or find a lighter engine. Balancing it was a PITA since I had to open up the covering near the tail to install the battery for balance. The replacement plywood in the nose is much heavier than what it was originally built with, it's stronger now, but also weighs more. Thinking of a Saito 65 if I can find one at a reasonable price. It should be a direct fit too.
12-29-2016, 10:11 AM
#11
Hey acdii, I have a question I think you can answer. You are following the Rascal 168 build do you see any similarity to the way the T-Clip is built and the way theat kit goes together? I was curious if SIG used some what the learned from ARF building/manufacturing techniques to this new kit? What can I say the wheels are always turning in spite of the rust and squeaks!
12-29-2016, 10:41 AM
#12
Thread Starter
The Clips is conventional slab build with a few formers and lite ply sides, all laser cut. No slot or tabs were used to build it that I could see. Pretty sure the ARF are jig built for speed and accuracy where they clamp a side down, place the jig over it, snap in the formers, and glue, then flip it over and do the other side, then glue the bottom on and then the top. I doubt it took them any more than 15 minutes to complete the fuse.
What I would really like to see is how the heck they can do the covering so good and consistent.
What I would really like to see is how the heck they can do the covering so good and consistent.
12-30-2016, 04:43 PM
#14
Thread Starter
Wow, OK SIG, You frigging ROCK!!
Guess what I got today.
Yep, the parts I ordered yesterday.
Need to do a little sanding to make the hatch fit perfect, then inset the magnets I used in the other hatch so it stays put in flight, apply the new decals, and consider the power for it again. I think the plane will perform better with an FA-62 instead of the FG-11. Both are the same engine, so the weight difference will be a plus as the FA is lighter, and since I usually fly less than 15 minutes, the difference in fuel use shouldn't matter. With the FG-11 I can fly an hour on 12 ounces, but I have rarely flown more than 20 minutes, I get bored by then. If this plane would fly well on an OS 52, I would swap them out and put the FG-11 on the LT-40.
Guess what I got today.
Yep, the parts I ordered yesterday.
Need to do a little sanding to make the hatch fit perfect, then inset the magnets I used in the other hatch so it stays put in flight, apply the new decals, and consider the power for it again. I think the plane will perform better with an FA-62 instead of the FG-11. Both are the same engine, so the weight difference will be a plus as the FA is lighter, and since I usually fly less than 15 minutes, the difference in fuel use shouldn't matter. With the FG-11 I can fly an hour on 12 ounces, but I have rarely flown more than 20 minutes, I get bored by then. If this plane would fly well on an OS 52, I would swap them out and put the FG-11 on the LT-40.
