Wing Repair and Tank Removal

B

blanducci

Member
I have been flying 14-13-2 N74424 for about 50 hours now (had it at airventure 2017) but it’s time to deal with the wing walk. It seems that over the years several patches and bits of wood have been added in attempts to repair this section of the wing. After going over the damage with a local wood expert (Marc Stamsta who builds wooden ailerons for Corsairs) we’d come to the conclusion that if the wing was off it would be much easier to access the extent of the damage and do the repair.

Besides broken off diagonals, rib damage, and lower wing skin damage below the walk area we could also see that screws installing the fuel tank have split the wing rib those screws are penetrating.

Will removing the right wing fuel tank provide access to the root wing ribs and upper and lower skins? Could this be an alternative to pulling the wing?

Next - if pulling the wing is still best I’d appreciate going over this with someone. I’ve seen at least one post here that highlights the procedure but I’d like to have some more detail on how best to deal with the gear chain, flap cable, and aileron cables.

Thanks,
Bill
 
Thanks for the photo. I see that the outboard rib top is not split like mine is. Not sure what will be considered an appropriate repair there. I assume someone used larger than original screws in mine without predrilling.

Is there room between the top of the tank and the bottom of the upper wing skin to increase the ply thickness in that area?

Most of my damage is aft of the rear spar between the rib that supports the flap and the partial root rib. It may make sense to start the project by pulling the screwed down portion of wing skin and tank. From there perhaps removing the upper and/or lower skins aft if the tank?
 
It will be easier to do a good repair with the wing off. However, it is possible to do it with the wing on.
Several ribs will undoubtedly have to be replaced, as well as the top and bottom skin which will be scarfed to remaining good skin. Many have reinforced this area with varying success.
As to the tank cover screws, I seem to remember that they are screwed into doublers around the perimeter of the tank bay---not the ribs. The tank covers have ribs on the underside of the skin. Instead of 3/32 or 1/8" mahogany, I'd use Finnish birch, 4 or 5mm. It has more plies and is more rigid. Scarfing, gluing as well as screwing the cover down seem to be the best method of attachment. Get your friend's help.......

AND....keep those supersized, 200+ pound pax from jumping up and down the wingwalk!
I'm sure others here have their own "best methods." Maybe they'll have some input.
Dan
 
I also agree that removing the wing would make it easier. Sometimes these jobs have a way of expanding, and you're begging for a place to stop. My 14-19 developed a fuel tank leak. After pulling the tank, it was discovered that the spreader plates on the spars had some cracks, and needed replacement. A frame was built in place under the wing, before it's removal. After ensuring the fuselage was supported, and disconnecting everything, it was a simple matter to slide the wing outboard, do the work, and slide it back. Tom Robinson
 
I suspect that spongy tank covers were one of several reasons that Bellanca went to thicker skin after the 14-13 series. Later Vikings went to installing the tanks from the underside, so that the whole wing walk area/tank cover was a one piece, glued down affair. Dan Torre has said that he glues them down now , rather than all of those little screws that eventually get loose and allow the fabric to stretch and break down. The fillet area (behind the rear spar) is often a mass of broken glue joints, some of which will need major redoing and some can be fixed by injecting glue. I have seen extra ribs installed in that area and lots of makeshift repairs. I will need to replace my tank cover soon and think I will follow Dan Cs advice on using birch ply clear to the end of the fillet. One piece glued down. Something else to think of is that the average American is 40+ lbs heavier than when Bellanca designed these planes. I wonder if Bellanca ever thought that these planes would still be flying 70 years after they left the factory? _____Grant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top